JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner was appointed as a Nakaguard through employment exchange by the Administrator, Municipal Board, Chirawa by order, dated January 28, 1976. He was confirmed on the said post by the Chairman of the Municipal Board by order, dated February 18, 1977. Thereafter the petitioner was appointed as sub- nakedar after selection by the Commission by an order of the Executive Officer, dated January 6, 1978. The petitioner was then promoted on the post of Nakedar on temporary basis by order, dated April 30, 1981. The petitioner's services were terminated by order Annexure 1, dated December 20, 1982 by the Chairman, Municipal Board, Chirawa. The petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 310(5) of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as -the Act"), before the Regional Assistant Director, Local Bodies, Jaipur. The Regional Assistant Director by his judgment, dated March 21, 1983. Annexure 2, quashed the order Annexure 1, dated December 20, 1982, but imposed a penalty of withholding one increment with cumulative effect. 2. The petitioner after the decision of the Regional Assistant Director, appeared for duty on March 24, 1983 before the Executive Officer. Municipal Board. The petitioner along with his application for appearing on duty also submitted a photostat copy of the judgment, Annexure 2. dated March 21, 1983. The Executive Officer by letter, Annexure 4, dated March 30, 1983 informed the petitioner that he could not be taken on duty as the Chairman had ordered not to allow the petitioner to join duty as his work was not satisfactory. The petitioner then submitted an application before the Director, Local Bodies on April 4, 1983. The Director made the following endorsement on the application which has been submitted and marked as Annexure 5: "The appellant is weeping, call the Chairman on April 11, 1983." According to the petitioner he made another application before the Director on April 5, 1983 wherein he stated that inspite of order, Annexure 2, dated March 21, 1983, the Chairman and the Executive Officer, Municipal Board were not taking the petitioner on duty. The petitioner also submitted a representation against the Chairman, Shri Radhey Shyam Sharma to the Secretary, Local Self Government Rajasthan on April 5, 1983 on which the Secretary Shri Anandilal Rungta passed the following order: "It is not correct in principle that an employee be sent to the very place. The petitioner also submitted a representation against the Chairman, Shri Radhey Shyam Sharma to the Secretary, Local Self Government Rajasthan on April 5, 1983 on which the Secretary Shri Anandilal Rungta passed the following order: "It is not correct in principle that an employee be sent to the very place. He may be put elsewhere." This application submitted to the Secretary has been filed and marked as Annexure 7. 3. The case of the petitioner further is that the Director, vide Annexure 8, dated April 5. 1983 wrote to the Collector, Jhunjhunu for taking steps to allow the petitioner to join duties in Municipal Board, Chirawa and in case there was any difficulty in joining duties there, then the petitioner should be allowed to join duties in come other Municipal Board. The petitioner appeared before the Collector, Jhunjhunu on April 6, 1983, and prayed that he may be allowed to join duties in and of the Municipal Boards in District Jhunjhunu. He submitted an application. Annexure 9, on April 6, 1983. before the Collector, Jhunjhunu and prayed that he may be allowed to join duties at Municipal Board, Mandrela (Navalgarh) as the Chairman, Municipal Board, Chirawa would harass him in case he would be made to join duties at Municipal Board, Chirawa, The Collector, by order Annexure 10 dated April 27, 1983 forwarded the order of the Deputy Secretary Administration, dated April 5, 1933 to the Cliairman, Municipal Board, Chirawa with a direction to take the petitioner on duty and send the compliance report. The petitioner submitted an application, Annexure 11, dated April 29, 1983 addressed to the Executive Officer, Municipal Board, Chirawa for joining his duties, the petitioner, inspire of that, was not allowed to join duties by the Executive Officer. The petitioner was further informed by the Executive Olficer that the Chairman of the Board had given direction not to take the petitioner on duty. 'rice petitioner in these circumstances again submitted an application Annexure 12. dated May 6, 1983, before the Collector, Jhunjhunu. 4. The petitioner having failed to join his duty, inspite of all efforts made by him as mentioned above, lie has filed the present writ petition on May 13, 1983 and has prayed for an appropriate writ, order or direction to direct the Chairman/Executive Officer, Municipal Board, Chirawa to take the petitioner on duty in compliance of the order dated March 21, 1983. Annexure 2, passed by the Regional Assistant Director, Local Bodies, Jaipur. It has also been prayed that appropriate steps be taken against the respondents for disregarding the order Annexure 2, dated March 21, 1983. 5. On a show cause notice given to the respondent a reply has been filed on behalf of the Municipal Board. Chirawa and Shri Radhey Shyam Sharma at present Chairman. Municipal Board, Chirawa. It has been stated in the reply that the answering respondents received notices from the Regional Assistant Director, Local Bodies, and in that connection wrote a letter on March 2, 1983 with the request that the case may he adjourned because the record relating to the petitioner had already been sent to the Director. Local Bodies. Jaipur. It was further mentioned that the petitioner had also filed an appeal under Section 300 of the Act before the Director, Local Bodies and the record had been requisitioned by the Director and as there was only one fill in connection with the petitioner, the same had been sent to the Director. It was not passible to submit the record simultaneously before the Director as well as the Regional Assistant Director and it was prayed that as soon as they would receive the record back from the office of the Director, Local Bodies, the same would be submitted before the Regional Assistant Director. The Regional Assistant Director however, did not pay any attention to this letter and without any jurisdiction heard the appeal exparte and set aside the order, dated December 20, 1982. A typed copy of the letter, dated March 2, 1983 has been submitted and marked Annexure R.1. It has been admitted that total emoluments of the petitioner after certain deductions came to Rs. 445/- and that petitioner has not been paid salary from December 20, 1982. The other facts of not allowing the petitioner to join duty have been admitted. In the additional pleas it has been stated that the petitioner was removed from the service due to embezzlement, corruption and negligence in his work on various times The petitioner was given warning and he also submitted apology. On an earlier occasion the petitioner was suspended, but he was again taken in service. In the additional pleas it has been stated that the petitioner was removed from the service due to embezzlement, corruption and negligence in his work on various times The petitioner was given warning and he also submitted apology. On an earlier occasion the petitioner was suspended, but he was again taken in service. The petitioner had filed two appeals against the order, dated December 20, 1982, out of which one was filed under Section 300 of the Act before the Director, Local Bodies and the other under Section 310( i) of the Act before the Regional Assistant Director. The respondents have filed Annexures R.2 to R.18 to show that the petitioner was found guilty of various charges of mischief, forgery, embezzlement and negligence in his work. The petitioner was served with charge-sheet and after considering his reply and a report submitted by the Executive Officer, The Chairman after applying his mind and going through the conduct of the petitioner terminated the services of the petitioner on December 20, 1982 vide Annexure R. 19. It has thus been stated that the petitioner was again and again committing mischiefs and causing loss to the Municipal Board and he was not working satisfactorily at all. Many opportunities were given to the petitioner and his case was considered sympathetically many times. The petitioner was also given warning but he was not interested in improving his work and he was committing theft in the collection of octroi duty. He was served with charges but he gave wrong replies to the charges. He was also called for personal hearing, but he did not appear and in these circumstances it could it not be said that no proper opportunity was given to the petitioner before termination of his services. It has thus been alleged that the order of termination, dated December 20, 1982 was fully justified in the facts as I circumstances of the case and no illegality was committed in it. It has been further alleged that the order, Annexure 2, dated March 21, 1983, passed by Regional Assistant Director is illegal and without jurisdiction. Appeal under Section 310 (5) lies to the Council or Board if such order is pissed by the Chairman. If has been further alleged that the Chairman, Municipal Council, respondent No. 5. has already made a representation to Hon'ble State-Minister, Local Self Government on April 6, 1983. Appeal under Section 310 (5) lies to the Council or Board if such order is pissed by the Chairman. If has been further alleged that the Chairman, Municipal Council, respondent No. 5. has already made a representation to Hon'ble State-Minister, Local Self Government on April 6, 1983. It has been mentioned in this representation that the petitioner had come in the office of the Chairman on April 2, 1983 and abused Itim. He gave a warning to the Chair man that he would definitely conic there and even the father of the Chairman would not be able to stop him. The petitioner has thus no respect for anybody and he is not happy with those persons who are not allowing him to play mischief amid earn money illegally. 6. A perusal of the documents filed by the respondents along-with their reply go to show that serious charges were levelled against the petitioner. After a report of the enquiry officer, the Chairman had terminated the services of the petitioner by order, Annexure 1. dated December 20, 1982. The petitioner then exercised his statutory right of appeal as given tinder section 310 (5) of the Act. The Regional Assistant Director was authorised to hear appeals and the order of the Chairman, dated December 20, 1982 was set aside by him by order, Annexure 2, dated March 21, 1983. There is no force in the contention of the respondents that the Regional Asstt. Director had no jurisdiction to hear any appeal against an order passed by the Chairman and the authorities competent to hear such appeal were the Council or the Board. Mr. Dhankhar, learned counsel for the petitioner, in this regard pointed out the notification No. F. 3 (135) LSG/77-IV dated 21-1-1978, whereby the State Government has delegated the powers to the Regional Assistant Director for hearing appeals under Section 310 (5) of the Act. The respondents are thus not justified to take the stand that the order, Annexure 2, is illegal and without jurisdiction. The order, Annexure 2. has been passed by the Regional Asstt. Director in exercise of his statutory powers given under Section 310 (5) of the Act. The other objection raised by the respondents with regard to order. Annexure 2. dated Match 21, 1983 is that they had informed the Regional Asstt. The order, Annexure 2. has been passed by the Regional Asstt. Director in exercise of his statutory powers given under Section 310 (5) of the Act. The other objection raised by the respondents with regard to order. Annexure 2. dated Match 21, 1983 is that they had informed the Regional Asstt. Director by letter, dated March 2, 1983 that the record relating to the petitioner had already been sent to the Director, Local Bodies and as there was only one file of the petitioner, the record cannot be made available to the Regional Asstt. Director till it was received back from the office of the Director Local Bodies. The Regional Asstt. Director in his order, Annexure 2, dated March 21, 1983 has mentioned that nobody appeared from side of the Municipal Board, Chirawa inspire of notices serval on them three times nor any reply was received nor the concerned record. It has been further mentioned in the order that the Executive Officer Municipal Board, was given registered notice but no reply was received. The Municipal Board was also given a notice that exparte order would be given against them but inspite of that nobody appeared from the side of the Municipal Board nor the record was sent. In these circumstances the Regional Asstt. Director was observed that the appellant -petitioner was heard on March 21, 1983. Thereafter he considered the record submitted by the petitioner and after taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case he considered it proper to set aside the order of termination and imposed a punishment of with holding one grade increment with cumulative effect. The Regional Asstt. Director being an appellate authority had set aside the order of termination passed by the Chairman and had considered proper to impose the penalty of with-holding one grade increment with cumulative effect and this order having become final, there was no further occasion for the respondents to over-look or disobey such order. The charges levelled against the petitioner, however grave culminated in the punishment of with-holding of one grade increment and the order passed by the Regional Asstt. Director having become final it is not competent for this Court to again go into the merits of the charges. The Chairman on the basis of the charges had considered proper to set miuate the services of the petitioner, but the Regional Asstt. Director having become final it is not competent for this Court to again go into the merits of the charges. The Chairman on the basis of the charges had considered proper to set miuate the services of the petitioner, but the Regional Asstt. Director in appeal did not consider the termination of the services as proper and instead awarded punishment of with-holding of one grade increment. 7. Apart from the order, dated March 21, 1983, Annexure 2, having become final and binding on respondent Nos. 4 and 5. a perusal of the documents Annexures 5 to 12 clearly go to show that the Deputy Secretary Administration, Secretary to the Local Self Government, Government of Rajasthan and the Collector, Jhunjhunu had also repeatedly directed the respondents to allow the petitioner to join duty, but the respondents persisted in flouting their directions also. The action of the respondents its not allowing the petitioner to join duty inspite of the order of Regional Asstt. Director is wholly illegal and unjustified. 8. It may be observed that in case the petitioner still commits any illegality or does not work in a proper and efficient manner in the interest of the Board, the respondents are free to take action against the petitioner in accordance with law. However, respondent No. 5. who is holding high office of Chairman, Municipal Board, Chirawa should not have any rancour or prejudice against the petitioner who is a small employee in the Municipal Board and will not make it a prestige point against the petitioner. 9. With the above observations, this writ petition is allowed and respondent Nos. 4 & 5 are directed to allow the petitioner to join duty with immediate effect. *******