Case Note & Summary
The case involves a writ appeal filed by the appellants (CRPF authorities) against an order of a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Karnataka dated 15.07.2014 in W.P.No.86607/2012. The respondent, Mallappa Holkundi, was enlisted as a constable in CRPF on 21.05.2010 and was posted to 116 Battalion on a temporary basis. On 19.09.2011, the third appellant (Director Inspector General of Police, Group Centre, CRPF) issued a termination notice under Rule 5(1) of the Central Civil Service (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965, terminating the respondent's services. The respondent challenged the termination before the learned Single Judge, who quashed the termination order and directed reinstatement with all consequential benefits. The appellants appealed against this order. The core legal issue was whether the termination was valid under Rule 5(1) of the CCS (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965. The appellants argued that the termination was in accordance with the rules as the respondent was a temporary employee. The respondent contended that the termination was illegal as no notice was given and his representation was not considered. The court analyzed the provisions of Rule 5(1) and found that the termination was not in compliance with the rule as the required notice period or pay in lieu thereof was not provided. The court held that the termination was arbitrary and illegal. Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal and upheld the learned Single Judge's order directing reinstatement with all consequential benefits.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Termination of Temporary Employee - Rule 5(1) of Central Civil Service (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965 - Validity of Termination - The respondent, a temporary constable in CRPF, was terminated without notice and without considering his representation. The court held that termination without compliance with Rule 5(1) is illegal and arbitrary. The learned Single Judge's order quashing the termination and directing reinstatement with consequential benefits was upheld. (Paras 2-5)
B) Service Law - Reinstatement - Consequential Benefits - The court affirmed that upon quashing an illegal termination, the employee is entitled to reinstatement with all consequential benefits including continuity of service and back wages, unless the employer demonstrates that the employee was gainfully employed elsewhere. (Para 5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the termination of the respondent (a temporary constable in CRPF) under Rule 5(1) of the Central Civil Service (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965 was valid and in compliance with the rules, and whether the learned Single Judge was justified in quashing the termination order and directing reinstatement with consequential benefits.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The order of the learned Single Judge dated 15.07.2014 in W.P.No.86607/2012 quashing the termination order dated 19.09.2011 and directing reinstatement with all consequential benefits is upheld.
Law Points
- Termination of temporary employee must comply with Rule 5(1) of CCS (Temporary Service) Rules
- 1965
- Notice period or pay in lieu thereof mandatory
- Termination without notice and without considering representation is illegal
- Reinstatement with consequential benefits is proper remedy
Case Details
2019 LawText (KAR) (02) 57
Writ Appeal No.200289/2015
B. Veerappa, P.G.M. Patil
S. S. Aspalli (ASGI) for appellants, Shivakumar Kalloor for respondent
The Special Director General, Central Zone, Central Reserve Police Force, Salt Lake Sector III, Kolkata, West Bengal State and others
Mallappa Holkundi S/o Bhimsha
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ appeal against order of learned Single Judge quashing termination of a temporary constable in CRPF and directing reinstatement with consequential benefits.
Remedy Sought
Appellants sought to set aside the order of the learned Single Judge dated 15.07.2014 in W.P.No.86607/2012 and confirm the termination order dated 06.03.2012.
Filing Reason
The appellants (CRPF authorities) challenged the learned Single Judge's order quashing the termination of the respondent and directing reinstatement with consequential benefits.
Previous Decisions
Learned Single Judge in W.P.No.86607/2012 dated 15.07.2014 quashed the termination order dated 19.09.2011 and directed reinstatement with all consequential benefits.
Issues
Whether the termination of the respondent under Rule 5(1) of the CCS (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965 was valid and in compliance with the rules.
Whether the learned Single Judge was justified in quashing the termination order and directing reinstatement with consequential benefits.
Submissions/Arguments
Appellants argued that the termination was in accordance with Rule 5(1) of the CCS (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965 as the respondent was a temporary employee.
Respondent contended that the termination was illegal as no notice was given and his representation was not considered.
Ratio Decidendi
Termination of a temporary employee under Rule 5(1) of the CCS (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965 must comply with the requirement of notice or pay in lieu thereof. Failure to provide such notice or consider the employee's representation renders the termination illegal and arbitrary. The proper remedy is reinstatement with all consequential benefits.
Judgment Excerpts
This intra Court appeal is filed by the appellants against the order dated 15.07.2014 made in W.P.No.86607/2012, wherein the learned Single Judge of this Court quashed/setaside the impugned order dated 19.09.2011 passed by the 3rd respondent Director Inspector General of Police, Group Centre, CRPF, and ordered to reinstate the respondent into service with all consequential benefits.
It was the case of the petitioner before the learned Single Judge that on 21.05.2010 the petitioner/present respondent was enlisted for the post of constable in CRPF, at Group Centre, Bengaluru and was allotted 116 Battalion on Temporary basis and he was discharging his duties with honesty and integrity without blemish.
3rd respondent/present appellant No.3 issued termination notice dated 19.09.2011 (Annuxure-A) under the provisions of Rule 5(1) of Central Civil Service (Temporary Service) Rules 1965 (for short ‘the Rules’) by the Commandant of the Office of Director and Inspector General of Police, Group Centre, CRPF, Muzzaffarpur, Bihar on the premise that...
Procedural History
The respondent filed W.P.No.86607/2012 before the High Court of Karnataka challenging the termination order dated 19.09.2011. The learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition on 15.07.2014, quashing the termination and directing reinstatement with consequential benefits. The appellants filed the present writ appeal under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act against that order. The appeal was heard and dismissed on 28.02.2019.
Acts & Sections
- Central Civil Service (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965: Rule 5(1)
- Karnataka High Court Act: Section 4
