Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Rajendra Kashinath Badgujar, was appointed as a casual labourer in the Central Railway, Manmad, with effect from 23rd December 1987. He was subjected to medical examination and was given monthly pay from 1988. However, he was not absorbed as a regular employee. His services were terminated by an order dated 17th May 1993 on the ground that there was no further sanction to the project. He challenged the termination before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai, which dismissed his application holding that he was only a monthly rated casual labourer without temporary status and thus not entitled to legal protection. The petitioner then filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court. The court heard the parties and considered the contention that the termination was without inquiry. The court noted that the petitioner was a monthly rated casual labourer without temporary status. The court held that such a labourer is not entitled to protection under Article 311 of the Constitution and his services can be terminated without holding a disciplinary inquiry. The court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the Tribunal's order.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Termination of Casual Labourer - Monthly Rated Casual Labourer - Termination without inquiry - The petitioner was a monthly rated casual labourer without temporary status - The court held that such a labourer is not entitled to protection under Article 311 of the Constitution and his services can be terminated without holding a disciplinary inquiry - The Tribunal's dismissal of the application was upheld (Paras 2-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the termination of services of a casual labourer without temporary status requires a disciplinary inquiry.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. The order of the Central Administrative Tribunal is upheld.
Law Points
- Termination of casual labourer without temporary status does not require disciplinary inquiry
- Casual labourer not entitled to protection of Article 311 of Constitution of India
Case Details
Writ Petition No. 364 of 2002
V.G. Palshikar, V.R. Kingaonkar
Mr. D. V. Gangal with Mr. S. V. Morne for the Petitioner, Mr. Suresh Kumar for the Respondents
Rajendra Kashinath Badgujar
Union of India, through the General Manager, Central Railway; Chief Engineer, Central Railway; Bridge Engineer, Central Railway
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging termination of services of a casual labourer.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought quashing of termination order and reinstatement with continuity of service.
Filing Reason
Petitioner's services were terminated without holding any disciplinary inquiry.
Previous Decisions
Central Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai dismissed Original Application No. 1050 of 1993 and Review Petition No. 69 of 2000.
Issues
Whether the termination of services of a casual labourer without temporary status requires a disciplinary inquiry.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that his services could not be terminated without holding an inquiry.
Respondents contended that the petitioner was a monthly rated casual labourer without temporary status and thus not entitled to protection.
Ratio Decidendi
A monthly rated casual labourer without temporary status is not entitled to protection under Article 311 of the Constitution and his services can be terminated without holding a disciplinary inquiry.
Judgment Excerpts
The Tribunal held that the Petitioner is not entitled to get any legal protection in as much his services were temporarily hired and he was only a casual labour.
On behalf of the Petitioner, it is contended that the services of the Petitioner could not be terminated without holding any inquiry.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed Original Application No. 1050 of 1993 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai, which was dismissed. A Review Petition No. 69 of 2000 was also dismissed. Thereafter, the petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 364 of 2002 before the Bombay High Court.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 311
