Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
RAI CHATTOPADHYAY
Rounak Bandyopadhyay – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
Judgment :
Rai Chattopadhyay, J.
1) The two above writ petitions filed by the same petitioner emanates in connection with one purported disciplinary enquiry proceeding, which has been followed by a purported order of termination of the writ petitioner from service. The first one that is W.P.No. 25707 (w) of 2017 was filed to challenge the alleged illegality of the charge sheet issued against the petitioner. In the other one that is W.P.No. 7478 (w) of 2018, the petitioner has challenged the impugned order of his termination from service. Hence, both are inter-related and this common judgment effectively decides both.
2) In the selection process started with publication of the vacancy notification in May 2016, the writ petitioner had qualified and was appointed in the respondent No.2/a public sector undertaking, under the Ministry of Power, Government of India. He was appointed to the post of Manager (Technical) pertaining to the Grade-E4. The offer of appointment was vide letter dated July 27, 2016, the petitioner’s acceptance of offer of appointment was on August 4, 2016 and finally the company’s acceptance thereof was vide order dated August 9, 2016. The petitioner was appointed fro
Probationary employees have limited protections under Article 311, permitting non-stigmatic terminations based on suitability assessments without the full rigor of disciplinary proceedings.
If misconduct is the foundation to pass the order, then an enquiry into misconduct should be conducted and an action according to law should follow. But if it is (sic) notice, it is not incumbent upo....
The court upheld the imposition of a minor penalty but set aside the termination, finding it unjust as it was based on the same grounds as the penalty, violating principles of natural justice.
Termination of a probationer based on misconduct requires a formal enquiry; failure to do so renders the termination stigmatic and punitive.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between termination simpliciter and punitive termination based on the nature of the inquiry and the purpose of the termination.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
