SATYAJIT KR. SHIL Vs. TRIPURA STATE LEGAL SERVICE AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has challenged his order of discontinuation dated 27.06.2018 communicated to him by the Deputy Secretary of the Tripura State Legal Services Authority.

(2.) Brief facts are as under :

(3.) The impugned order is not passed by the Deputy Secretary but is merely communicated to the petitioner and summoned of the original files concerning the petitioners engagement and termination which shows that a detailed note was presented by the Member Secretary on 22.06.2018 pointing out the fact that the petitioners performance was average or below standard for the years 2015-2016. Thus the petitioner has, despite opportunities, not improved his performance. In the opinion of the said authority, the petitioner was unlikely to mend his ways in near future also. Considering his antecedents, he opined that there is no further scope to retain the petitioner in service, therefore, recommended that the same may be discontinued. These suggestions were approved by the Executive Chairman of State Legal Services Authority. Thus, the impugned order is just a communication by the Deputy Secretary to the petitioner, the decision was taken by the authority.