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 hearing.

Judgment :

Subhash Upadhyay, J.

The petitioner who is aggrieved by the termination of contractual engagement as a Conductor has filed the present writ petition challenging the impugned order dated 26.03.2011 on the ground that the same is based on the alleged misconduct and the said order being stigmatic in nature is liable to be quashed as the same has been passed in utter violation of the principles of natural justice without conducting any inquiry. The petitioner has further prayed for considering her case for regularization on the post of Clerk looking into her past services.

2. The brief facts of the case as narrated in the Writ Petition are as follows:

The petitioner after completing the apprenticeship training (clerk) at the Corporation Office at Nainital from 21.10.1986 to 15.03.1988 was engaged as a Conductor on 09.07.1998 on contractual basis and was to be paid 0.35 paisa per kilometer. The petitioner deposited Rs. 2000/- as security amount and continued as Conductor. The petitioner was issued a show cause notice on 15.03.2011 stating therein that on a spot inspection of the bus, it was found that in total 75 way bill, the petitioner has by tempering the ticket machine had prepared 1062 tickets with zero balance and such an amount of Rs. 45,407/- was embezzled by her. The said act amounts to corruption, for which, the petitioner was asked to submit her reply within one week.

3. The petitioner replied to the said notice on 18.03.2011 stating therein that she was not provided any training for operating the ticket machine and due to incidentally pressing some button of the ticket machine the zero balance tickets were printed. The Show Cause Notice dated 15.03.2011 and the reply submitted by the petitioner on 18.03.2011 reveals that a simple Show Cause Notice was issued to the petitioner to explain her case and no inquiry or any opportunity of personal hearing was provided to the petitioner. The Assistant General Manager of the Uttarakhand Transport Corporation vide impugned order dated 26.03.2011 on considering the reply submitted by the petitioner concluded that the petitioner by interpolating in the ticket machine had embezzled an amount of Rs. 45,407/-. He found the petitioner to be guilty of corrupt practice and directed the termination of the contract of the petitioner as Conductor and further ordered for forfeiture of the entire dues and security amount deposited by the petitioner in favour of the Corporation. The impugned order dated 26.03.2011 reads as hereunder:

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order being founded on misconduct and being stigmatic in nature is liable to be quashed on the ground that neither any inquiry nor any opportunity of hearing was provided to the petitioner. He submits that the impugned order of termination of Contract is in fact a punishment founded on misconduct, is stigmatic in nature, is vested with the evil consequence of loss of pay and affects the future career of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Purshottam Lal Dhingra vs. Union of India 1957, SCC online Supreme Court, 5 and submits that in absence of any inquiry and due opportunity of hearing provided to the petitioner, the entire exercise is vitiated in law.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents-Corporation submits that the petitioner