IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
PURNENDU SINGH, J.
CWJC No. 17327 of 2024
(10.12.2024)
Prakash Nath Mishra @ Prakash Nath ... Petitioner
vs.
State of Bihar & Ors. ... Respondents
Constitution of India – Article 311(2) – Termination of job engagement contract – Termination of contract, if held to be punitive in nature, proper course would be to follow mandate of Article 311(2) of Constitution of India – It needs to be proved that delinquency is not a mere 'motive' but has transformed to become 'foundation' for termination to avail protection of Article 311(2) of Constitution of India – In present case, petitioner has not pleaded calling for interference with termination order on the ground that it is punitive in nature and it does require enquiry to get protection of Article 311(2) of Constitution of India – Respondents have lost trust and confidence in petitioner – Bihar State Power Holding Company found it unsafe to retain petitioner in present position of trust and responsibility causing loss to Company and on any other account – Having regard to terms and conditions of offer of appointment provided to petitioner by respondents, petitioner don't derive any legal right who has continued as a contractual employee on specific terms and conditions agreed by him – Termination which is based on performance assessment of petitioner don't require any inquiry being simplicitor termination, calling for any interference on account of violation of Articles 14, 16 and 311 of Constitution of India – Writ Petition dismissed. (Paras 14, 15, 19, 23, 25, 27, 31 and 32)
Purnendu Singh, J.—Heard Mr. Krishna Ballabha Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner; Mr. Lalit Kishore and Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, learned Senior Counsels, Mr. Akhileshwar Singh and Mr. Venkatesh Kirti, learned counsels for the Bihar State Power Holding Company Limited and Mr. Raghwanand, learned GA 11 along with Rajnish Shandilya, AC to GA 11for the State.
2. Petitioner has inter alia prayed for following reliefs in the paragraphs No.1 of the writ petition:—
“(1) A writ in the nature of Certiorari be issued for quashing the Notification No. 539 dated 23.09.2024, HII/ PF Advisor 1075/2022 dated 23.09.2024 i.e. Annexure - P/7 (with all consequential benefits), issued by the Under Secretary, Bihar State Power Holding Company Limited (BSPHL), said to have been issued on approval of the competent authority i.e. Chairman cum Managing Director, Bihar State Power Holding Company Limited, Patna, whereby the petitioner's Job Engagement Contract (Annexure- P/1) has been terminated with immediate effect by a three line order, without assigning any reason and without any prior notice and in blatant violation of the terms of the petitioner's job engagement contract (Annexure – P/1).
(II) A writ in the nature of Certiorari be issued for quashing the Office Order No. 1318 (H-IX vividh (Awash) 4002/2024/Patna dated 08.10.2024, Memo No. 1419 dated 08.10.2024 i.e. Annexure- P/8 (with all consequential benefits), issued by the Deputy General Manager (Human Resource/ Administration, Bihar State Power Holding Company Limited (CMD, BSPHL) said to have been issued on approval of the competent authority i.e. Chairman cum Managing Director, Bihar State Power Holding Company Limited, Patna, whereby the petitioners' quarter allotment order. has been cancelled with immediate effect, without assigning any reason.
(III) A writ in the nature of Certiorari be issued for quashing the Subsequent Letter No. 1074 dated 10.10.2024 (Annexure- P/9) issued by the Executive Engineer (Civil), Civil Dision No. II, Punaichak, Patna, whereby the petitioner has been directed to immediately vacate the petitioner's quarter no. B/5 (old) at New Punaichak, Patna.
(IV) A writ in the nature of Certiorari be issued for quashing the Subsequent letter to disconnect water supply to petitioner's Quarter No. B/5 (Old) Electricity Board Colony, New Punaichak, Rajwanshi Nagar, Patna on 10.10.2024 i.c. M.O. No. 1419 dated 08.10.2024, sent to petitioner on 14.10.2024 without assigning any reason.
(V) A writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other writ or writs, order or orders, direction or directions be issued commanding upon the respondents to not to do anything in violation of the specific terms of job engagement contract contained in Annexure- P/1
(VI) A writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other writ or writs, order or orders, direction or directions be issued commanding upon the respondents to not to do anything with prejudiced mindset for causing any kind of unnecessary harm, injury or harassment to the petitioner, with prejudiced mindset for oblique purposes and with malafide intention.
(VII) A writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other writ or writs, order or orders, direction or directions be issued commanding upon the respondents to not to issue any whimsical order for causing any kind of unnecessary harm, injury or harassment to the petitioner, for oblique purposes and with malafide intention.
(VIII) Any other relief or reliefs for which the petitioner is found to be entitled to, be also granted to the petitioner.”
Brief Facts:
3. The brief facts of the case are that an advertisement for Job Engagement Contract Notice No. 06/2022 dated 07.10.2023 was issued by Bihar State Power Holding Company Limited, Patna (in short BSPHCL), for the post of Advisor, (Energy Accounting & Audit), B.S.P.H.C.L. The petitioner, a retired (I.P.S.) and Former D.I.G. of Police, had joined the Bihar State Power Holding Company Limited, Patna as Advisor, (Energy Accounting & Audit), B.S.
Ravindra Kumar Misra vs. U.P. State Handloom Corporation Ltd.
State of U.P. vs. Ram Bachan Tripathi
Rajesh Kumar Srivastava vs. State of Jharkhand
Abhay Jain vs. High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan
Workmen of Sudder Office, Cinnamara vs. Management of Sudder Office
State of U.P. vs. Kaushal Kishore Shukla
Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation vs. S.G. Kotturappa
Termination of a contractual employee based on an FIR does not constitute a stigmatic termination if the service agreement allows termination without inquiry.
A termination order can be deemed stigmatic if issued without proper inquiry, violating principles of natural justice, necessitating reinstatement of the affected party.
Punitive action should not be taken against an individual without establishing or proving the allegations made against them through a proper enquiry and affording them a reasonable opportunity to def....
Stigmatic termination of contractual employee on misconduct grounds, carrying penal consequences like dues forfeiture and re-employment bar, requires natural justice compliance including inquiry and ....
The court upheld the termination of a contractual employee as valid, emphasizing that rights are governed by the contract terms, and principles of natural justice do not apply in the same manner to c....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.