The court affirmed that natural justice principles apply even in contractual employment but can be flexible; proper opportunity must be given, but not always in the traditional sense.

JUDGMENT :

Anand Pathak, J.

1. The present appeal under Section 2 (1) of the Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 is preferred by the appellant/respondent No.2 being crestfallen by the order dated 20-07-2024 passed by learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.15348 of 2024 whereby the writ petition filed by the respondent (hereinafter referred to as “the petitioner”) has been allowed.

2. Precisely stated facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as Family Planning Counselor on contract basis in 2007 and thereafter the said post was given the nomenclature as Block Community Mobilizer on which petitioner was again appointed on contract basis on 19-08-2021. Contract period of petitioner was extended by the appellant from time to time. A show cause notice dated 22-03-2024 was issued to the petitioner indicating lapses occurred in discharge of duties and poor performance of duties by the petitioner. Petitioner replied to the same on 05-04-2024 explaining all the allegations levelled against her. Finding the reply of the petitioner unsatisfactory, the appellant terminated the contractual services of petitioner. Being aggrieved by the same, petitioner approached learned writ Court. Learned Writ Court allowed the said writ petition setting aside the impugned order of termination of petitioner with liberty to competent authority to proceed in accordance with law after holding an enquiry in the matter. Being aggrieved by the order of the writ Court, National Health Mission (respondent No.2 in writ petition) approached this Court by filing the instant writ appeal.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant refers the Contractual Human Resources Manual, 2021 of National Health Mission as well as its clauses. According to the said Manual, in case of any misconduct, involvement in financial irregularities, involvement in criminal act or involvement in any act which undermines the image of National Health Mission, oral or written opportunity of hearing would be given to the employee and in case of non-reply or non-satisfactory reply, appointing authority can terminate the contract of the employee. Since petitioner was a contractual employee and her non performance of duty and nonchalance behaviour given bad impact on the image of National Health Mission, therefore, being an employer, the National Health Mission has right to terminate the contract of the petitioner.

4. It is further submitted that since the work of petitioner was not found satisfactory and despite warning, she did not improve her working, therefore, her services were terminated by the appellant. First petitioner was given show cause notice and since reply of the petitioner was not found to be satisfactory, therefore, her services were terminated by the appellant by passing a speaking order clarifying each and every lapse of petitioner. Therefore, it is not a case where order of termination has been passed without affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Learned Writ Court erred in passing the impugned order without considering material aspect of the matter that the termination of petitioner was based on her work performance and it was passed after giving show cause notice to her. Thus, prayed for setting aside the impugned order.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent (petitioner in writ petition) opposed the submission and while supporting the order passed by learned Writ Court submits that since the order of termination of petitioner was stigmatic in nature therefore, proper opportunity of hearing was required to be given by the appella