ARVIND SINGH CHANDEL
Anuj Shuckla – Appellant
Versus
Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority (BIADA) – Respondent
Arvind Singh Chandel, J.—This petition has been preferred by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:—
“(i) For quashing the Order/Memo No 6778/Estt dated 20.10.2023 issued by Executive Director (Operations), BIADA (Annexure P/13), Patna whereby the petitioner has been dismissed from service by the Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as BIADA) on 20.10.2023, in most arbitrary manner without compliance of the principles of natural justice and in complete violation of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India, equity and against all the canons of justice.
(ii) For quashing the Order dated 04.09.2024 passed in Appeal Case No 3 of 2023 communicated to the petitioner vide Memo No 4603 dated 09.09.2024 (Annexure P/16) by the Respondent No 2, whereby and where under the Appeal filed by the Petitioner has been dismissed in a mechanical, arbitrary, pick and choose manner, whereas the similarly situated coterminus contractual employees have been reinstated considering the fact that the termination of the Petitioner is termination stigmatic and without compliance of the principles of natural justice, service jurisprudence and in teeth of the servi
A termination order can be deemed stigmatic if issued without proper inquiry, violating principles of natural justice, necessitating reinstatement of the affected party.
Termination of a contractual employee based on an FIR does not constitute a stigmatic termination if the service agreement allows termination without inquiry.
Termination of a temporary employee must follow due process, including an inquiry if the action is stigmatic and punitive.
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.