Bombay High Court Quashes Stigmatic Termination of Temporary Employee Without Enquiry — Violation of Natural Justice. Termination order set aside as it contained allegations of misconduct and was passed without any opportunity of hearing or departmental enquiry.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD In Favour of Accused
  • 74
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Vishwanath Dnyanoba Kirade, was appointed as a Clerk on 24.7.2006 by the first respondent, Nav Akanksha Mahila Mandal, which runs the second respondent school. He worked continuously for 3 years and 2 months until his termination on 9.10.2009. The termination order was stigmatic as it contained allegations of misconduct. The petitioner appealed to the School Tribunal in Appeal No.50 of 2009, but the third respondent (Social Welfare Officer) did not file a written statement. The petitioner contended that the post was advertised for Scheduled Caste category and he possessed relevant qualifications including MS-CIT and typewriting certificates. The core legal issue was whether a temporary or deemed confirmed employee can be terminated by a stigmatic order without an opportunity of hearing or enquiry. The court held that the termination order was stigmatic and could not be sustained without following principles of natural justice. The court set aside the termination order and directed reinstatement with continuity of service but without back wages, as the petitioner had not worked during the intervening period.

Headnote

A) Service Law - Termination - Stigmatic Order - Natural Justice - Temporary Employee - The termination order contained allegations of misconduct and was passed without any opportunity of hearing or enquiry - Held that such a stigmatic order cannot be sustained without following principles of natural justice (Paras 3-4).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether a temporary employee or a deemed confirmed employee could be terminated by issuance of a stigmatic order without an opportunity of hearing and/or enquiry.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court set aside the termination order dated 9.10.2009 and directed reinstatement of the petitioner with continuity of service but without back wages.

Law Points

  • Stigmatic termination requires opportunity of hearing
  • Natural justice principles apply to temporary employees
  • Deemed confirmation does not confer permanency
  • Termination order containing allegations is stigmatic
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2015 LawText (BOM) (02) 18

WRIT PETITION NO. 1481 OF 2012

2015-02-05

RAVINDRA V. GHUGE

Shri Godbole R.J. for Petitioner, Shri Gunale V.D. for Respondents 1 & 2, Shri Panpatte V.S. for Respondent 3

Vishwanath Dnyanoba Kirade

Nav Akanksha Mahila Mandal, Vasant Anusuchit Jati Madyamik Ashram School, Social Welfare Officer (S)

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

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging termination order of a temporary employee.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought quashing of termination order and reinstatement with continuity and back wages.

Filing Reason

Petitioner was terminated by a stigmatic order without any opportunity of hearing or enquiry.

Previous Decisions

Petitioner had filed an appeal before the School Tribunal (Appeal No.50 of 2009) which was pending or decided unfavorably; the third respondent did not file a written statement.

Issues

Whether the termination order is stigmatic? Whether a stigmatic order can be passed without opportunity of hearing or enquiry?

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that the termination order contained allegations of misconduct and was stigmatic, thus requiring an enquiry. Respondents argued that the petitioner was a temporary employee and could be terminated without enquiry.

Ratio Decidendi

A stigmatic termination order cannot be passed against a temporary employee without giving an opportunity of hearing and conducting an enquiry, as it violates principles of natural justice.

Judgment Excerpts

The issue that has been raised for the consideration of this Court is as regards whether a temporary employee or a deemed confirmed employee could be terminated by issuance of a stigmatic order without an opportunity of hearing and/or enquiry.

Procedural History

Petitioner appointed on 24.7.2006, terminated on 9.10.2009. He filed Appeal No.50 of 2009 before the School Tribunal. The present writ petition was filed in 2012.

Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Quashes Stigmatic Termination of Temporary Employee Without Enquiry — Violation of Natural Justice. Termination order set aside as it contained allegations of misconduct and was passed without any opportunity of hearing or departm...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Management Petitions Challenging Tribunal Orders of Reinstatement and Back Wages for Teachers. School Tribunal has jurisdiction under Section 9 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regula...