1 WPS No. 3556 of 2018 2025:CGHC:25924 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3556 of 2018  Pawan Mahroliya S/o Tejpaal Mahroliya, aged about 41 years, R/o Naya Sarkanda Bilaspur, Tehsil and District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1. President, Municipal Corporation Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 2. Commissioner, Municipal Corporation Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 3. Inspector General of Police (Intelligence), Range Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 4. Superintendent of Police, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Petitioner :- Mr. Siddhant Tiwari, Advocate, For Respondents No.1& 2 :- Mr. Pritendra Chauhan Advocate, on behalf of Mr. Ashutosh Trivedi, Advocate. For Respondents-State :- Mr. Pankaj Singh, Panel Lawyer. ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Digitally signed by ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Date: 2025.06.23 17:31:36 +0530 2 WPS No. 3556 of 2018 Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 19/06/2025 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of order dated 27.11.2014 by which his services were terminated from the post of Sanitary Worker finding him not suitable for the said post as he had suppressed the fact that on the date of appointment two criminal cases bearing Crime No.120/2006 & 267/2008 were registered against him. 2. Mr. Siddhant Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that the respondents – authorities are absolutely unjustified in terminating the petitioner from the post of Sanitary Worker without giving him opportunity of hearing and they have also not considered the fact that the petitioner has already been acquitted of the charges for offence under Sections 147, 294, 452, 506B & 223 of the IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act in Crime Nos.120/2006 & 267/2008 on 20.05.2008 and 30.10.2008, respectively. Therefore, the instant writ petition deserves to be allowed. 3 WPS No. 3556 of 2018 3. Mr. Pritendra Chauhan, learned counsel for respondents No.1 & 2, and Mr. Pankaj Singh, learned State counsel, would oppose the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner and support the impugned order. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival submissions made herein-above and also gone through the material available on record meticulously. 5. Admittedly, the petitioner herein was appointed on the post of Sanitary Worker vide appointment order dated 10.09.2013 under the scheme of compassionate appointment. However, vide impugned order dated 27.11.2014, the petitioner’s services were terminated without affording him opportunity of hearing on the ground that at the time of appointment two criminal cases bearing Crime No.120/2006 & 267/2008 were registered against him. However, respondents No.1 & 2 have ignored the fact that the petitioner has already been acquitted of the charges framed in above stated two criminal cases long before the date of appointment and even otherwise, the respondents could have considered the case of the petitioner in light of the principles of law laid down by their Lordships of the Supreme in the matter of Avtar Singh v. Union of India 4 WPS No. 3556 of 2018 and others 1 followed in the matter of Ravindra Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others 2 which they did not do. 6. As per record, the petitioner has already been acquitted in Crime Nos.120/2006 & 267/2008 long before the date of appointment which has not been considered by the respondents-authorities and, as such, the impugned order dated 27.11.2014 is hereby set aside. Respondent-Municipal Corporation is directed to consider the case of the petitioner in light of the decisions of the Supreme Court in the matter of Avtar Singh (supra) followed in the matter of Ravindra Kumar (supra) within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order and pass the fresh order after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 7. With the aforesaid observation/direction the instant writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- - Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Ankit 1 (2016) 8 SCC 471 2 (2024) 5 SCC 264