JUDGMENT S.H.A. Raza, J. - The impugned order challenged in this writ petition indicates that the services of the petitioner were terminated for the reason of non-availability of the work, as well as misappropriation of sufficient Kraya Vikray Samitis Funds. It has been averred in the counter-affidavit that the order dated 9.9.1986 was not passed by way of punishment, but the same was passed only because the petitioner was temporarily appointed for a particular scheme and the scheme was over, as is evident from Annexure-2 to the writ petition. In Annexure-C4 annexed with the counter affidavit it has been averred that no work was available on the post upon which the petitioner was working and that on account of payment of salary the Samiti had been suffering losses. Furthermore it also transpires that there existed grave allegations of misappropriation of funds against the petitioner and hence he should be removed from service of the Samiti. 2. In view of the fact that the order is based upon a charge and is stigmatic, the same deserves to be quashed. 3. In view of what has been indicated herein above, the writ petition succeeds and is allowed. A writ in the nature of certiorari is quashing the impugned order of termination dated 5-9-1986 and 9-9-1986 contained in Annexure-2 to this writ petition. The petitioner would be entitled for the consequential benefits arising out of the quashing of the impugned order. However, there will be no order as to costs.