1.

The Petitioner states that the Order of termination of the Petitioners services came
as a complete surprise and was shocked by the arbitrary action of the Respondent
No. 2. The Petitioner states that he was the sole earner of the family after the death
of his father and considering this very reason he was appointed on a compassionate
ground to the said post of Bailiff. The impugned Order completely pushed the
Petitioner and his family to shock as they were faced with the situation full of
uncertainty.

2. The Petitioner states that he had no legal knowledge nor he was conversant with any
rules which could enable him to take appropriate remedy under the law against such
Termination Order. It is respectfully submitted that the Petitioner with a ray of hope
that justice would be done to him approached his Department as well concerned
Hon’ble Minister for Co-operative Sector and pointed out his grievance. It is states
that every time he met the concerned Department Head or Hon’ble Minister he was
assured of positive action and was informed that he would ne reinstated back in the
service.

3. The Petitioner states that with a hope and sincere expectation that the Respondents
will do justice to him and reinstate him back to work considering his service and
circumstances his family was placed due to such termination Order he waited for the
positive reply from the Respondents expecting some indulgence from the authorities.

4. The Petitioner states that since no positive action was forthcoming even after several
visits and requests to the Hon’ble Minister, Hon’ble MLA and Head of the
Department he was advised by one of his friend to consult a lawyer in Panaji. It is
respectfully submitted that he accordingly consulted a lawyer in Panaji and gave him
all the case papers. The Petitioner states that the concern counsel sought some time
to peruse the papers and accordingly called the Petitioner after few days.

5. The Petitioner states that the concerned Counsel advised the Petitioner upon going
through the case papers that he ought to file a Writ Petition challenging the said
Order of Termination. It is submitted that the concerned Counsel said he would take
steps to file the said Petition provided the Petitioner makes a deposit of Rs. 25,000/-
towards the filing and drafting. The Petitioner states that since he was not in financial
position to make such payment sought some time to make the payment. It is
submitted that the Petitioner even after period of three months was not able to
arrange the said amount and hence accordingly expressed his difficulty to the
concern Counsel and requested him to proceed with filing by assuring him that the
fee would be arranged till then.
6. The Petitioner states that considering the difficulty of the Petitioner the counsel
advised him to opt for the services of the legal aid society and get the Order
challenged. It is submitted that thereafter the Petitioner approached Legal aid and he
was informed to complete the necessary formalities to consider his Application under
Legal Aid.

7. The Petitioner states that he thereafter completed the formalities of legal Aid and
the present Counsel was appointed to represent the Petitioner somewhere in month
of October 2017. The Petitioner states that the present counsel could not proceed
with the drafting as he did not have any case papers or necessary material with him
and hence advised the Petitioner to get the complete details regarding his
appointment and service from his personal file under Right to information Act.

8. The Petitioner states that he thereafter obtained the information under Right to
information and the present counsel drafted the Petition and same came to be filed
before this Hon’ble Court.

9. The Petitioner states that the delay caused in approaching this Hon’ble Court was not
deliberate on part of the Petitioner and was only because of the extreme financial
difficulties that the Petitioner was pushed to due to sudden termination. It is
respectfully submitted that this Hon’ble Court ought to entertain the present Petition
as otherwise extreme prejudice would be caused to the Petitioner as he is the sole
earner in the family and has to look after his ill mother.

10. The Petitioner states that no prejudice would be caused to the Respondents if the
present Petition is heard. It is respectfully submitted that the delay is caused due to
sufficient cause as stated in above paras and therefore ought to be condoned and the
Petition requires to be heard on merits.