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

2024 Supreme(Pat) 696

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Bibek Chaudhuri, J.
Sanjeev Ranjan, Son of Shri Parmanand Sharma - Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary and ors. – Respondents
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 9975 of 2022
Decided On : 06-09-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Aditya Prakash Sahay, Advocate, Mr. Debkinandan Maiti, Advocate, Ms. Piyush Tiwari, Advocate, Ms. Ankita Kumari, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Pankaj Kumar (SC-12), Mr. Lalit Kishore, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Vikash Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Ayush Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Kanishka Shankar, Advocate

Termination of a contractual employee based on an FIR does not constitute a stigmatic termination if the service agreement allows termination without inquiry.

Headnote:

Service Law – Termination of employee under contractual service – The service agreement empowering the Managing Director to terminate the services of the petitioner, under contractual service, without any notice or enquiry – Though it would be open to the petitioner to avail the remedies as are available under the contract/engagement letter, which have been denied to him, however, protection under Article 311 of the Constitution of India will have no application – As a matter of fact, the services of the employees may be terminated for misconduct, negligence, inefficiency or other disqualifications and those may be motive or inducing factor which influences the Government to take action under the terms of contract of employment or service rules – It a right exists under the contract or the rule to terminate the services, then the motive operating on the mind of the employer is irrelevant and the termination is not a punishment – Writ petition dismissed. (Paras 26 & 28)

Dr. Vijayakumaran CPV vs. Central University of Kerala, (2020) 12 SCC 426 – Distinguished.

Appar Apar Singh vs. State of Punjab, (1970) 3 SCC 338; Parshotam Lal Dhingra vs. Union of India, AIR 1958 SC 36; Chandra Prakash Shahi vs. State of U.P., (2000) 5 SCC 152 – Relied.

JUDGMENT :

Bibek Chaudhuri, J.

1. The Petitioner has filed the instant petition, praying for the following reliefs:-

    (i) For issuance of order(s), direction(s), writ(s) particularly in the nature of writ of Certiorari for quashing of Impugned Letter bearing no. BMSIC/05099/02-2017/2257 dated 30.06.2022 issued by Managing Director, Bihar Medical Services & Infrastructure Corporation Limited (BMSICL), whereby and whereunder the petitioner has been restrained to perform administrative as well as financial duties of the corporation for the mere reason that one FIR vide Patna Sadar State Vigilance unit case no. 09/22 dated 27.06.2022 was registered against the petitioner for the offences u/s 13(1)b, r/w 13(2), r/w 12 of PC Act, 1988 and 120 (B) of IPC and it has been further directed to submit his reply within three days as to why legal action as per due procedure of law be not initiated against the petitioner.

    (ii) For issuance of order(s), direction(s), writ(s) particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus for a direction upon the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner herein to continue with his services as a General Manager (Projects & Design) in Bihar Medical Services & Infrastructure Limited (BMSICL) and/or in alternative for a direction upon the respondent authorities herein not to take any coercive steps in relation to the Impugned Letter against the petitioner until final outcome of this petition.

    (iii) For issuance of any other relief(s) for which the petitioner is entitled for.

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, pursuant to an advertisement, the Respondent Corporation issued an offer letter to the Petitioner to join the post of Project Engineer at a gross monthly salary of Rs. 60,000/- on 4th July, 2012. The Petitioner joined his service as Project Manager of the Respondent Corporation. Subsequently, on 12th June, 2014, the Petitioner was given offer letter for the post of General Manager (Project and Design) on contractual basis for a period of one year at a consolidated remuneration of Rs. 80,000/- per month. In pursuance of such offer, an agreement was executed by and between the Petitioner and the Corporation for a period of 12 months to serve the Corporation as General Manager (Project and Design). After the expiry of initial 12 months, the Petitioner continued his job in the same post, though no agreement was executed. Subsequently, the Petitioner continued with his job successfully to the satisfaction of the Corporation and, therefore, he was granted certificate of excellence in the year 2013, 2016 and 2017. That on 18th September 2018, the Government of Bihar vide notification issued by the General Administration Department acknowledged and approved the regularization of employees on contractual basis until an employee attains the age of superannuation. The Corporation in its 42nd Board meeting, dated 9th September, 2021 adopted the said gazette notification, dated 18th of September, 2018.

3. While the Petitioner was rendering his service, allegation of acquiring disproportionate asset to his known source of income, illicitly and illegally to the extent of Rs. 1,76,72,907/- was made by the Vigilance Investigation Bureau and in the light of the said allegation an FIR, vide Patna Sadar Vigilance Unit Case No. 09 of 2022, dated 27th of June, 2022, was registered against the Petitioner for the offences punishable under Section 13(1)b, read with Sections 13(2) and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Section 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.

4. It is claimed also by the Petitioner that upon search conducted in the house, office and bank locker, respectively, in course of investigation, the investigating agency found in all Rs. 4,60,000/- along with some other documents. Prima facie, the allegation of acquiring assets, disproportionate to his known source of income, was not even proved, but on the recommendation of the Officer on Special Duty, Health Department, Government of Bihar, the Petitioner was restr

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