[2026:RJ-JP:11941] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2516/2026 Deep Chand Kumawat S/o Lal Chand Kumawat, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Kumawato Ki Dhani, Pawalia, Tehsil Sanganer, Jaipur, Rajasthan 303904 ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Urban Development And Housing Department Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.) 2. Commissioner, Nagar Nigam Jaipur, Pandit Deendayal Upadhyay Bhawan, Lal Kothi, Nagar Nigam Jaipur-302015 3. Deputy Commissioner, Sanganer Zone, Nagar Nigam Jaipur ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Sara Parveen For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manoj Choudhary, Ms. Pooja Dixit, Mr. Yadvendra Patel and Ms. Swati Thory for Mr. G.S. Gill, AAG HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI Order 19/03/2026 1. This writ petition has been filed with the following prayers - “i) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the illegal and arbitrary verbal discontinuation of the petitioner from the post of Computer Operator dated 07.01.2026, being violative of principles of natural justice and Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India; ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioner on the post of Computer Operator with continuity of service and all consequential benefits, including payment of arrears of remuneration and other admissible service benefits; [2026:RJ-JP:11941] (2 of 5) [CW-2516/2026] iii) Declare the action of the respondents in discontinuing the petitioner without issuance of any written order and without affording opportunity of hearing as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional; iv) Direct the respondents not to replace the petitioner by any other person on the same post or to engage any fresh person to perform the duties of Computer Operator in place of the petitioner; v) Any other appropriate order, which may be found just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, be passed in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner has been continuously engaged as a Computer Operator under the respondent Municipal Corporation since the year 2012 and has been discharging duties relating to computer operations, data management, online portals, maintenance of official records, correspondence, and other essential administrative functions. From the very inception, the petitioner was engaged in a regular and uninterrupted manner and not on a casual or sporadic basis, thereby establishing a long-standing and continuous engagement of more than thirteen years. The nature of duties performed by the petitioner is perennial and essential, as the functioning of the Municipal Corporation is dependent upon computerized operations and data management. During the course of his service, the petitioner was entrusted with responsibilities not only by subordinate officers but also by senior officers including the Deputy Commissioner, and was at times directly assigned work by Respondent No. 3, as reflected from documents annexed on record. The petitioner has performed his duties with utmost sincerity, dedication, and efficiency, and no complaint or adverse remark has ever been made against him. In recognition of his satisfactory services, the respondents issued appreciation letters and experience certificates. Further, Provident Fund deductions [2026:RJ-JP:11941] (3 of 5) [CW-2516/2026] were regularly made from his remuneration, clearly indicating the existence of an employer-employee relationship. The petitioner was also assigned duties pursuant to Office Order dated 12.11.2025 relating to helpline services for Special Intensive Revision, demonstrating that he continued to be entrusted with official responsibilities even by State authorities. Despite the continuous and perennial nature of work and the respondents having availed his services for more than a decade, the petitioner was abruptly and arbitrarily discontinued from service on 07.01.2026. The discontinuation was effected verbally without issuing any written order and without affording any notice, opportunity of hearing, or following due process of law, in clear violation of the principles of natural justice. The said action has caused grave financial hardship and mental agony to the petitioner, hence the present writ petition. 3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been working with the respondents on the post of computer operator on contractual basis since 2012 till the date of termination. She further submits that the petitioner’s service were discontinued on 07.01.2026 by way of a verbal order which the respondents orally communicated to the petitioner, but no written communication was given to the petitioner. She further submits that the respondent before terminating the services of the petitioner have neither afforded him an opportunity of hearing nor any notice whatsoever has been served upon the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that he has completed his instructions and he has been informed that a complaint was received by the respondent which was forwarded to [2026:RJ-JP:11941] (4 of 5) [CW-2516/2026] the placement agency through which the petitioner was afforded appointment and based on that complaint, the services of the petitioner has been discontinued. 5. Heard and considered the submissions and perused the material available on record. 6. This Court finds that the petitioner has continuously served the respondents since 2012, with his engagement continuing uninterrupted until its abrupt oral termination. This long tenure unequivocally demonstrates that his services were satisfactory and met all expectations. However, without assigning any reason or issuing a show-cause notice, the respondents terminated the petitioner's services through mere oral communication. Although no punitive order was passed, the respondents were nonetheless obligated to provide reasons for terminating the petitioner's long and unblemished service, while affording him a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Jaggo v. Union of India & Ors. reported in 2024 SCC OnLine 3826 has observed as under: - “14. The abrupt termination of the appellants’ services, following dismissal of their Original Application before the Tribunal, was arbitrary and devoid of any justification. The termination letters, issued without prior notice or explanation, violated fundamental principles of natural justice. It is a settled principle of law that even contractual employees are entitled to a fair hearing before any adverse action is taken against them, particularly when their service records are unblemished. In this case, the appellants were given no opportunity to be heard, nor were they provided any reasons for their dismissal, which followed nearly two decades of dedicated service.” 7. The respondents' action violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India. They have also failed to demonstrate adherence to the Principles of Natural Justice (PNJ) in terminating the petitioner's services. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents [2026:RJ-JP:11941] (5 of 5) [CW-2516/2026] are directed to reinstate the petitioner to the same post forthwith, and this exercise shall be completed within four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 8. The stay application and all applications (pending, if any) also stand disposed of. (DR. NUPUR BHATI),J RAHUL KUMAR /25