Back
2019 Supreme(Megh) 196
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG
H.S. Thangkhiew, J.
Rakban G. Momin and Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State of Meghalaya and Ors. – Respondents
WP(C) Nos. 216 and 217 of 2019
Decided On : 15-10-2019
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : N. Mozika, Sr. Adv. and S.A. Shallam, Adv.
For the Respondent: K.P. Bhattacharjee, GA and R. Kar, Adv.
Violation of principles of natural justice in terminating the petitioners' service without issuing any show cause.
Headnote:
Natural Justice - Service Termination - IPC 153A, 500, 501, 505(c) - The court found that the ousting from service of the petitioners was done in violation of the principles of natural justice and their fundamental and legal rights were infringed upon. The impugned resolution was set aside and quashed, and the respondent No. 5 was directed to take back the petitioners into service and release the entire back wages as payable forthwith.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, who were lecturers at a college, were accused of making derogatory comments on social media and encouraging voters to vote for a political party. They were terminated from service without being issued any show cause, leading to the filing of writ petitions.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioners were ousted from service in violation of the principles of natural justice and their fundamental and legal rights were infringed upon.
Issues: Violation of principles of natural justice, legality of the complaint filed against the petitioners, termination from service without show cause, and the legality of the actions of the respondents.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the ousting from service of the petitioners was done in violation of the principles of natural justice and their fundamental and legal rights were infringed upon, leading to the setting aside and quashing of the impugned resolution.
Final Decision: The impugned resolution was set aside and quashed, and the respondent No. 5 was directed to take back the petitioners into service and release the entire back wages as payable forthwith.
JUDGMENT :
H.S. Thangkhiew, J.
1. These two matters being similar in nature will be dealt and disposed of by this common order.
2. The petitioner WP(C) 216 of 2019 Shri Rakban G. Momin was appointed as Lecturer in the Department of Garo, Mendipathar College, East Garo Hills, Meghalaya w.e.f. 27.07.2010.
3. The petitioner in WP(C) 217 of 2019 Shri Thangkan Ch. Marak was appointed as Lecturer in the Department of Philosophy, Mendipathar College, East Garo Hills, Meghalaya w.e.f. 21.02.2012.
4. On 10.4.2019, a complaint was lodged before the District Election Officer, and Assistant Returning Officer, North Garo Hills District, Resubelpara by the President of the Nationalist Peoples Party, Youth Front against the petitioners alleging therein that the petitioners had made derogatory comments on social media against the NPP candidate and that the petitioners were directly involved and had encouraged the voters to vote for the Congress Party. Thereafter, the OC Mendipathar PS registered the said complaint as Mendipathar P.S. Case No. 16 (04) 2019 u/s. 153A, 500, 501, 505(c) IPC on 14.4.2019 and notice were issued to the petitioners to appear before the OC Mendipathar on 17.04.2019 in connection with the aforesaid complaint.
5. It is the case of the petitioners that the respondent No. 5 (Governing Body Mendipathar College) without citing any reason directed the petitioners to take casual leave w.e.f. 18.4.2019 to 30.4.2019 and thereafter on expiry of the leave did not allow them to resume their duties and directed the petitioners to await the proceedings of the meeting of the Governing Body of the college. On 10.05.2019, the respondent No. 5 resolved in the Governing Body meeting that the petitioners cannot be placed in the teaching course unless they were cleared of the complaint or on orders of the Court. Being highly aggrieved the petitioners are before this Court, contending that they have been discharged from service without being issued any semblance of a show cause which is in violation of principles of natural justice, the complaint filed against the petitioners is not maintainable in law, the discharge, termination from service is simply based on the misconceived complaint and further the comments made were without any intention of causing incitement, communal hatred or to defame any individual, group or political party. As such, the petitioners have prayed that the impugned resolution be quashed and set aside and the Respondent No. 5 be directed be allow the petitioners to resume their services.
6. Dr N. Mozika, learned senior assisted by Ms. S.A. Shallam, submits that the entire action of the respondent No. 5 in ousting the petitioners from service is blatantly illegal, inasmuch as, no semblance of show cause was ever issued nor were they heard in any manner before the impugned resolution was passed. He further submits that the complaint so lodged is also not maintainable in law as Section 153A, 500, 501 and 505(1)(c) IPC are non-cognizable offences wherein proceedings under these Sections require prior sanction from Central and State Government as prescribed under Section 196 Cr.P.C.. Counsel also submits that the petitioners have been not allowed to resume their duties w.e.f. 4.5.2019, which in effect amounts to putting the petitioners either in suspension or terminating the services without any show cause or any opportunity of hearing being afforded. As such he prays that the actions of the respondents being highly illegal and unwarranted is liable to be interfered with by this Court and directions be issued to the respondent No. 5 to take back the petitioners into service.
7. Mr. R. Kar, learned counsel for the respondents fairly submits that the fact that the petitioners have been kept out of service since the expiry of their casual leave cannot be denied. He however submits that the impugned resolution is just the initial process, inasmuch as, by the same resolution it has been resolved that the Principal/Secretary serve show
