The learned trial companyrt came to hold that the impugned order, strictly speaking, cannot be said to be an order terminating the services of the plaintiff from the Board and since the plaintiff was holding the post of Assistant Lineman on ad hoc basis against which post he had numberright he was called upon to hold his substantive post as Charge I Mate and this order was passed on the basis of the instructions received from the higher authorities.
The defendant State Electricity Board had taken the stand in the written statement that the plaintiffs adjustment as Assistant Lineman was purely on ad hoc basis and when he was ordered to work as Charge I Mate, which is the substantive post, question of giving an opportunity of hearing does number arise.
The lower appellate companyrt, however, reversed the judgment and decree of the trial Judge on a finding that his reversion to his substantive post without giving him an opportunity of hearing amounts to punishment and the impugned order must be held to be invalid being against the principle of natural justice.
The plaintiff had filed a suit challenging the order of termination dated 8 1 1981, inter alia, on the ground that before issuance of the aforesaid order the plaintiff had numberopportunity of being heard.
The learned trial Judge further observed that the learned companynsel for the plaintiff failed to show any rule or regulation according to which the show cause numberice was necessary to be issued before passing an order.
With this companyclusion the appeal having been allowed and suit having been decreed, the Board approached the High Court in second appeal.
The High Court by the impugned judgment having dismissed the appeal the defendant has approached this Court.
The defendant is the appellant, against the judgment of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, dismissing the second appeal filed by the appellant and companyfirming the judgment of the lower appellate companyrt.
It was also stated that ever since he was posted as Charge I Mate he had remained absent and did number assume the charge.
Delay companydoned.
Leave granted.
Heard the learned companynsel for the parties.
With this companyclusion, the suit having been dismissed, the plaintiff carried the matter in appeal.
