SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2007 Supreme(SC) 1408

2007(8) Supreme 81
Supreme Court of india
(From Punjab and Haryana High Court)
Tarun Chatterjee & P. Sathasivam, JJ.
State of Haryana & Ors. — Petitioners
versus
Navneet Verma — Respondent
Appeal (civil) 5064 of 2007
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 23499 of 2004)
Decided on : 31-10-2007

Counsel for the parties :
For the Petitioners:Manjit Singh, AAG, P.N. Misra, Sr. Adv., Hari Kesh Singh and T.V. George, Advocates.
For the Respondent:M.K. Dua and Satbir Singh, Advocates.

important point
The State is empowered to abolish post(s) in administrative exigencies and in good faith.

Headnote:(a)Service Law – Appointment – Respondent’s appointment purely against temporary post and liable to be abolished at any time – No assurance or promise for a permanent employment held out – Services also terminable without notice whenever there was no vacancy against which he could be retained – When the post was validly abolished bona fide, termination in terms of appointment letter held to be not mala fide.(Paras 10 and 14)

       (b)Service Law – Abolition of post – Power of government in abolishing a post and role of the court for interference laid down.(Para 11)

       (1973) 2 SCC 650; (1974) 3 SCC 21; (1976) 2 SCC 844; (1980) 3 SCC 29; (2006) 4 SCC 132 – Relied upon.

       (c)Service Law – Abolition of Post – There is no illegality in abolishing the post on recommendation of the committee after taking into consideration the workload and activities of the HPBE – The actions by appellants held to be in administrative exigencies and good faith – Impugned judgment held not sustainable.(Para 13 to 16)

       Facts of the case:

       1.The respondent-herein was appointed as Accounts Executive in the Haryana Bureau of Pubic Enterprises on 16.07.1993. While continuing so, his services were terminated on 31.12.1994 on the ground that the post of Accounts Executive has been abolished.

       2.According to the respondent, there was no justification for abolition of the posts of Accounts Executive and it was done with a mala fide intention to dispense with his services without any basis.

       3.The High Court, after finding that the abolition of posts of Accounts Executives had not been done in good faith but only intended to get rid of the respondent-writ petitioner herein, quashed the order dated 30.12.1994 abolishing the posts of Accounts Executive and consequential termination of services of the writ petitioner. Direction was issued for reinstatement of the respondent with all consequential benefits.

       Findings of the Court:

       The post to which respondent was appointed is abolished in administrative exigencies and good faith.

       Result : Appeal allowed.

judgment

P. Sathasivam, J. —

1.Leave granted.

2.Whether the abolition of the post has been done in good faith or whether it is a camouflage to cover up and conceal the real intention of weeding out the respondent from service is the only question to be decided in this appeal.

BRIEF FACTS:

3.The respondent-herein was appointed as Accounts Executive in the Haryana Bureau of Pubic Enterprises (in short the HBPE) on 16.07.1993. While continuing so, his services were terminated on 31.12.1994 on the ground that the post of Accounts Executive has been abolished. According to the respondent-herein, the third appellant applied for the post of Financial Adviser. Even though she did not fulfill the prescribed requirement of three years experience after doing chartered accountancy, she had been appointed as Financial Adviser and the respondent-herein who was appointed as Accounts Executive was required to report to her due to which she wanted him to work as her personal staff. He did not carry out petty directions. When he brought these facts to the notice of the Member Secretary, HBPE, he wanted him to resign the job. The Member Secretary and the Financial Adviser seemed to have different attitude and started planning to eliminate him. Having no other option, on 26.07.1994, he made a representation to the then Chief Minister of Haryana. In the meanwhile, the Financial Adviser third appellant herein lodged a false and baseless complaint against him to the Member Secretary. Based on the complaint of the Financial Adviser, a preliminary inquiry was conducted. However, no action was taken against him on the basis of the report of the Inquiry Officer. But instead of taking any action, in accordance with law, his services have been dispensed with consequent upon the abolition of the posts of Accounts Executives.

4.According to the respondent, there is no justification for abolition of the posts of Accounts Executive and it was done with a malafide intention to dispense with his services without any basis. Though two posts of Accounts Executives were advertised, only one post was filled up by appointing him. Thus, according to him, the post was not abolished in good faith, but this was a device to weed him out from service. Therefore, the order of termination on the ground of abolition of post is liable to be set aside.

5.It is the case of Haryana Government and HBPE that the abolition of posts of Accounts Executives was not done with malafide intention or extraneous reasons. According to them, in January, 1994, it was felt that the work of Bureau was not being performed as per official requirements and it required restructuring of the staff vis-‘-vis the work load of the Bureau and it was observed that the contribution of two posts of Accounts Executives, especially, when there are two posts of Accountants were not result oriented and the work could smoothly be carried out on even without the two posts of Accounts Executives. It was further stated that the Accountants can send their case directly to the Financial Advisor, who was the head of the financial wing in giving advice regarding financial offers. Consequently, two posts of Accounts Executives were abolished and services of the respondent were terminated as he was no longer required.

6.Though a complaint was received from the Financial Adviser regarding mis-behaviour by the respondent-herein, preliminary inquiry was conducted into the allegations made, but no action was taken and the preliminary inquiry has no relevance with regard to the decision taken on the abolition of the posts. The said decision was taken to abolish the posts of Accounts Executives after obtaining permission of the government.

7.The Learned Single Judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, after finding that the abolition of posts of Accounts Executives have not been done in good faith but only intended to get rid of the respondent-writ petitioner herein, quashed the order dated 30.12.1994 abolishing the posts of Acc









































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top