Can’t terminate temporary staff on basis of exparte inquiry: HC
ALLAHABAD: The Allahabad high court has ruled that a temporary employee can’t be terminated only on the basis of an ex-parte inquiry. The court, in a recent ruling, said a regular departmental inquiry must be conducted before the termination of a temporary employee, wherein he should be given a chance to present his case. Saying this, the court quashed the termination order of a temporary worker who was working in the social welfare and rehabilitation office in Muzaffarnagar.
ALLAHABAD The Allahabad High Court has ruled that a temporary employee can’t be terminated only on the basis of an ex-parte inquiry.
The court, in a recent ruling, said a regular departmental inquiry must be conducted before the termination of a temporary employee, wherein he should be given a chance to present his case.
Saying this, the court quashed the termination order of a temporary worker who was working in the social welfare and rehabilitation office in Muzaffarnagar.
The order was passed by Justice Siddharth in a petition filed by RS Tyagi of Muzaffarnagar. The court, while allowing the writ petition said since the petitioner had retired, therefore the authorities concerned will pay him all the retiral benefits within three months.
The petitioner was appointed as a temporary employee on January 10, 1986. He completed two years of his probation period and began working as a temporary employee thereafter.
The department had terminated the petitioner’s service on December 1, 1992 without conducting a regular inquiry.
The allegation against the petitioner was that he, along with two other employees had sold a wooden log meant for public use.
Since the other two employees were permanent therefore, they were suspended by the authorities and since the petitioner was a temporary employee he was directly terminated on the basis of an ex-parte inquiry without giving him an opportunity to explain his case.
In 1993,the petitioner had challenged his termination order by filing a writ petition.
While allowing the petition Justice Siddharth observed, “The petitioner should have been given an opportunity for hearing by the concerned officers to explain his conduct and only thereafter, any order should have been passed. DM, Muzaffarnagar, conducted a confidential inquiry without giving the petitioner an opportunity.
He was terminated on the basis of that report. Hence, the termination order is punitive and bad as per law.”
:
THE COURT, WHILE ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION SAID SINCE THE PETITIONER HAD RETIRED, THEREFORE THE AUTHORITIES CONCERNED WILL PAY HIM ALL THE RETIRAL BENEFITS WITHIN THREE MONTHS.