[2026:RJ-JP:14712] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15793/2025 Gaurav Solanki S/o Sh. Kamlesh Kumar Lakhera, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Plot No. 866, Ram Nagar Colony, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of Home, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, 302005 2. The Director, State Forensic Science Laboratory, Rajasthan, Nehru Nagar, Jaipur, 302016 ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinod Kumar Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr. Parth Sharma for Mr. Bhuwnesh Sharma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNNURI LAXMAN Order 08/04/2026 1. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the order of termination dated 03.10.2025. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was appointed on compassionate appointment on the post of Lab Assistant on 06.10.2022 and he was on probation. While he was on probation, a show cause notice dated 29.07.2025 was issued to the petitioner making various allegations particularly allegations related to non-completion of assigned work, disobedience to the instructions of higher officers and there was allegation of insubordination apart from other allegations. Basing on the show cause notice, the impugned termination order has been passed. [2026:RJ-JP:14712] (2 of 3) [CW-15793/2025] 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even though petitioner was on probation, whenever the termination is basing on certain allegations, a regular enquiry required to be drawn and without such a procedure being adopted, the termination basing on the show cause notice is bad. It is also his submission that the petitioner was not given any opportunity to rebut such allegations and there is no material basing on which the respondent came to the conclusion that allegations levelled in the show cause notice have been proved. Therefore, he seeks quashing of the impugned termination order. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that there are serious allegations of misappropriation levelled against the petitioner relating to recovery of pistol and magazine and further allegations of obtaining photographs of female colleagues without her consent. 5. This Court is not on the aspect of merits and demerits of the allegations. When there are stigmatic termination, the requirement is that there must be a fair enquiry and an opportunity has to be given to both the parties to prove their case. In the present case, simply basing on the show cause notice, without their being any evidence and rebuttal evidence of the parties, the drastic decision of termination of employee was done. This procedure adopted by the respondent-Authority is unsustainable in the eye of law, therefore, the impugned termination order requires to be set aside. [2026:RJ-JP:14712] (3 of 3) [CW-15793/2025] 6. As a result, the present writ petition is allowed. The impugned termination order dated 03.10.2025 is quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner in service within a period of ten days from today, with continuity of service, however, this order shall not come in the way of the respondent to draw the fresh proceedings of an enquiry basing on the nature of the allegations, which compelled them to terminate the petitioner’s services and take appropriate action thereon. 7. Misc. applications, if any, stand disposed of. (MUNNURI LAXMAN),J PKS/20