Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal Regarding Termination of Temporary Employee in Cooperative Dairy Federation Case. The court upheld the termination of the appellant's services as valid due to the post not being regular under the applicable regulations.

  • 0
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The dispute arose from the termination of the appellant's employment as Assistant Manager (Quality Control) at the Pradeshik Cooperative Dairy Federation Ltd. The appellant was appointed on 24 July 1981 and placed on probation for one year. Following the promulgation of the Uttar Pradesh Cooperative Dairy Federation and Milk Union Centralised Service Rules in 1984, the appellant's employment status was challenged after he was relieved from his previous post and subsequently terminated under the 1975 Regulations. The appellant contended that he was a permanent employee, having been absorbed into a regular post after due selection. However, the High Court ruled that he remained a temporary employee, leading to the appeal before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court analyzed the relevant regulations and determined that the post held by the appellant was not regular as it had not existed for five years, thus validating the termination. The court also noted that the appellant's work was deemed unsatisfactory, further supporting the termination decision. Ultimately, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the High Court's ruling that the appellant's employment was governed by the temporary provisions of the regulations (Paras 766-769).

Headnote

A) Employment Law - Termination of Employment - Validity of Termination of Temporary Employee - Uttar Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1965, Sections 122-A - The appellant's termination was upheld as he was deemed a temporary employee due to the post not being regular under the applicable regulations. The court found that the post held by the appellant had not existed for the requisite five years, thus validating the termination (Paras 766-767).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the termination of the appellant's services was valid given his claim of being a permanent employee.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, affirming the High Court's decision that the appellant was a temporary employee and that the termination was valid under the applicable regulations.

Law Points

  • Termination of employment
  • Regular vs Temporary posts
  • Absorption in service
  • Applicability of service regulations
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

1992 LawText (SC) (08) 15

Civil Appeal Nos. 3321 and 3320 of 1990

1992-08-06

Yogeshwar Dayal, L.M. Sharma, M.M. Punchhi

1992 AIR 2093, 1992 SCR (3) 755, 1992 SCC (4) 17, JT 1992 (4) 459, 1992 SCALE (2) 125

M.S. Ganesh, S. Murlidhar, K.T.S. Tulsi, Pradeep Misra, Arun Sharma

Indra Kumar Chopra

Pradeshik Cooperative Dairy Federation Ltd.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Dispute regarding the termination of employment of a temporary employee.

Remedy Sought

The appellant sought to challenge the termination of his services.

Filing Reason

The appellant claimed he was a permanent employee and that his termination was unlawful.

Previous Decisions

The High Court ruled that the appellant was a temporary employee and upheld the termination.

Issues

Whether the appellant was a permanent employee or a temporary employee. Whether the termination of the appellant's services was valid under the applicable regulations.

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant argued that he was a permanent employee and that his termination was unlawful. The respondents contended that the appellant was a temporary employee and that the termination was valid.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the post held by the appellant was not regular as it had not existed for five years, thus validating the termination under the applicable regulations.

Judgment Excerpts

The post which he was holding could not be deemed to be a regular post. The appellant had no choice but to take his chance with the new authority. The impugned order of termination does not cast any stigma on the appellant.

Procedural History

The appeals arose from a common judgment of the Allahabad High Court dated 21 July 1989, which dismissed the writ petitions challenging the termination of the appellant's services.

Acts & Sections

  • Uttar Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1965: 122-A
  • U.P. Cooperative Dairy Federation and Milk Union Centralised Service Rules, 1984: Rule 17(1), Rule 17(3)
  • U.P. Cooperative Societies Employees Service Regulations, 1975: Para 17, Para 18, Para 19
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Directs Banks to Comply with RBI Prudential Framework for Stressed Assets Resolution in Writ Petition by Borrower Company. Court holds that the Prudential Framework dated June 7, 2019, requires lenders to convene a review meet...
Related Judgement
High Court Madras High Court Dismisses Insurance Company's Appeal in Motor Accident Claim — Pillion Rider Covered Under 'Bundled Policy' Despite 'Act Only' Label. Court holds that a 'Bundled Policy' providing personal accident cover for owner-driver also cove...