An employee with substantial service and promotions cannot be considered a temporary employee, and termination under such circumstances may be unjust.

ORDER

1. Under Regulation 69 of the Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation Employees Service Regulations, the services of the appellant were terminated on June 1, 1974 and the termination was with immediate effect. He was then the Chief Personnel Officer of the M.P. State Road Transport Corporation. He moved the High Court challenging the validity of the termination order, but the High Court has refused to give him relief stating that he continued to be a temporary employee.

2. We have examined the material. We are unable to accept the decision of the High Court. The appellant was initially taken in the government service in 1958. In 1962 when the Corporation was formed, he was taken by the Corporation. While in the service of the Corporation, the appellant was promoted at least on three occasions and the last promotion was in 1973 as Chief Personnel Officer (Head of Personnel Department). He has in all put in more than 15 years of service. To say that such an officer was not a permanent employee and remained only as a temporary employee is an abuse of the service jurisprudence. The Corporation ought not to have invoked the provisions of Regulation 69 to terminate the services of the appellant on the ground that he was temporary servant.

3. We allow the appeal set aside the order of termination and also the judgment of the High Court.

4. It is said that the appellant has in the meantime attained the age of superannuation. He is, however, entitled to monetary benefits. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, we direct that the appellant be paid one half of the salary from the date of his termination till he attains the age of superannuation. This payment will also take into account the revision of salary from time to time which the appellant would have been entitled to had he remained in service.

5. The payment thus ordered shall be made within three months and also spread over for the purpose of giving benefit of the income tax to the appellant.

6. Needless to state that the appellant is entitled to pensionary benefits as if he had retired upon attaining the age of superannuation.

7. No costs.

For Citation : 1992 Supp (2) SCC 513.