Case Note & Summary
The case involves a second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, filed by the original defendant, the Commandant of S.R.P.F. Group III, Jalna, challenging the judgment and decree dated 13th April, 1992 passed by the learned 3rd Additional District Judge, Jalna in Regular Civil Appeal No. 139/1985. The respondent, Amrata @ Amratlal s/o Laxman Bhurewale, was a police constable who was dismissed from service without a proper departmental inquiry and without being afforded an opportunity of hearing. The trial court had dismissed his suit, but the first appellate court allowed his appeal and modified the decree in his favor. The High Court framed a substantial question of law regarding the violation of principles of natural justice and Article 311(2) of the Constitution. The Court held that the dismissal order was void ab initio as it violated the mandatory requirement of a pre-decisional hearing. Consequently, the second appeal was dismissed, and the judgment of the first appellate court was upheld, granting the plaintiff reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Dismissal - Natural Justice - Article 311(2) of Constitution of India - Dismissal of a police constable without holding a departmental inquiry and without giving an opportunity of hearing is violative of principles of natural justice and Article 311(2) - Held that the order of dismissal is void ab initio and the plaintiff is entitled to reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages (Paras 1-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the dismissal of a police constable without holding a proper departmental inquiry and without affording an opportunity of hearing violates principles of natural justice and Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India.
Final Decision
The second appeal is dismissed. The judgment and decree dated 13th April, 1992 passed by the learned 3rd Additional District Judge, Jalna in Regular Civil Appeal No.139/1985 is confirmed. The plaintiff is entitled to reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages.
Law Points
- Natural Justice
- Audi Alteram Partem
- Article 311(2) of Constitution of India
- Section 100 CPC
- Substantial Question of Law
- Disciplinary Proceedings
- Police Constable Dismissal
Case Details
2014 LawText (BOM) (11) 10
Second Appeal No.321/1992 with Civil Application Nos.2590/1992, 8482/2008 & 2253/2014
Mr. S.P. Dound, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for Appellant; Amrata @ Amratlal Laxman Bhurewale Respondent in person
Commandant, S.R.P.F. Group III, Jalna
Amrata @ Amratlal s/o Laxman Bhurewale
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Second appeal under Section 100 CPC against judgment and decree in Regular Civil Appeal No.139/1985.
Remedy Sought
Appellant (original defendant) sought to set aside the judgment and decree of the first appellate court which allowed the plaintiff's appeal and modified the trial court's decree.
Filing Reason
The appellant challenged the first appellate court's decision on the ground that it erroneously set aside the dismissal of the plaintiff without proper inquiry.
Previous Decisions
Trial court dismissed the plaintiff's suit; first appellate court allowed the appeal and modified the decree in favor of the plaintiff.
Issues
Whether the dismissal of the plaintiff without holding a departmental inquiry and without affording an opportunity of hearing violates principles of natural justice and Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India?
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued that the dismissal was valid and the first appellate court erred in interfering.
Respondent argued that the dismissal was void for violation of natural justice and Article 311(2).
Ratio Decidendi
An order of dismissal passed without holding a departmental inquiry and without affording an opportunity of hearing is void ab initio as it violates the principles of natural justice and Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India.
Judgment Excerpts
By this appeal under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the original defendant has challenged the Judgment and decree dated 13th April, 1992 passed by the learned 3rd Additional District Judge, Jalna in Regular Civil Appeal No.139/1985.
The dismissal of the plaintiff without holding a departmental inquiry and without affording an opportunity of hearing is violative of principles of natural justice and Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India.
Procedural History
The plaintiff filed a suit challenging his dismissal. The trial court dismissed the suit. The plaintiff appealed to the District Court, which allowed the appeal and modified the decree. The defendant then filed the present second appeal in the High Court.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Section 100
- Constitution of India: Article 311(2)
