Back
AKIL KURESHI
Joydeep Bhusan – Appellant
Versus
State of Tripura – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Petitioner has challenged a memorandum dated 22.05.2020 passed by the District Disability Rehabilitation Officer, Agartala by which on the ground of misbehaviour and misconduct the petitioner’s tenure as a Technician was not extended further.
Brief facts are as under:
The petitioner was engaged as a Sales Counter Manager in the District Disability Rehabilitation Centre which is though a society registered under the Societies Act, is controlled by the Social Welfare Department of the Government of Tripura. There is no dispute raised that the said organization is State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution. I therefore proceed on such basis.
In the year 2012, the petitioner undertook the training as an “Ear Mould Technician” at Karnataka. After completion of the training the petitioner was engaged as an Ear Mould Technician by the District Disability Rehabilitation Centre under an order dated 02.07.2013. Since then the petitioner has been working in the said capacity attending to different camps organized by the Disability Centre, particularly for the benefit of senior citizens.
On 22.05.2020 the Director of District Disability Rehabilitation Centre issued the impu
Fairness in administrative action requires organizations, even if not governmental, to provide employees with the opportunity to respond to allegations before termination.
A petitioner cannot claim continuation of service beyond the contractual term without a stipulated right; adverse remarks do not invoke the principles of natural justice in such situations.
The court upheld the principle that contractual employment lacks an inherent right to renewal beyond the agreed term and validated the discontinuation of service without notice.
The termination of an employee based on medical unfitness is contrary to the protections established under disability laws, requiring adjustments or supernumerary positions for disabled employees.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the obligation of the respondents to provide alternative employment to a disabled employee as directed by the court under the Persons with Disab....
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 contractual employment must adhere to principles of natural justice, especially when allegations of misconduct are involved.
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
