Termination of temporary status employee on grounds of illegal conferment due to false declaration requires regular departmental inquiry with participation; preliminary inquiry insufficient if stigmatic/punitive.

ORDER

(By Hon’ble Mr. Justice Om Prakash VII, Member (Judicial)

Shri Vinay Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant in both the above cases and Shri K K Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents in OA No 1320 of 2012 while Shri Arvind Singh, learned counsel for the respondents in connected case OA No 514 of 2012, were present at the time of hearing. Both the aforesaid cases have been heard together and therefore are being decided by way of a common judgment. OA No. 1320 of 2012 is being treated as the leading case.

2. Following relief has been sought through OA No 1320 of 2012:

“(i) Issue an order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 14.9.2012 passed by the respondent no. 4 (Annexure A-9) to this original application.

(ii) Issue an order or direction in the nature of mandamus direct the respondents not to interfere the peacefully working to applicant post of class IVth employee Group ‘D’ category in the Office of Teliphone Exchange Mithaura Bazar District Maharajganj during the pendency of the present Original Application so that justice may be done otherwise the applicant.

(iii) To issue any other suitable application, order or direction, as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper to meet the ends of justice to the applicant.

(iv) Award cost of this application in favour of the applicant.”

Similarly, following relief has been sought by way of OA No 514 of 2012:

(i) Issue an order or direction commanding the respondents directing the respondent no 2 regularised the service to applicant on the post of class IVth employee Group ‘D’ category in pursuance of the order dated 1.1.2010 issued by Assistant General Manager Administration Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Office of Assistant General Manager Telicom U.P. East Circle Lucknow by passing speaking a reasoned order within stipulated period as fixed by this Hon’ble Court.

(i) Issue any other suitable application, order or direction as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper to meet the ends of justice to the applicant.

(ii) Award cost of this application in favour of the applicant.”

3. The brief facts of OA No 1320 of 2012 and OA No 514 of 2012 are that both the OAs have been filed by the same applicant namely Shri Rajesh Kumar. In OA No 1320 of 2012, the applicant has claimed that he was working as a class IVth employee with status Mazdoor / Casual Labour in the office of the Telephone Exchange, Mithaura Bazar, District Maharajganj since 1988. It has been claimed in both the OAs that the applicant was granted temporary status by the competent authority of the respondents in the year 2000 so much so that in the year 2002, he was appointed as TSM and his service book etc. was also prepared. In OA No 514 of 2012, the applicant has alleged that his services were due for regularization but despite the issuance of the order dated 01.01.2010 which enables the applicant for regularization, the respondents have not done the same. In the OA No 1320 of 2012, the applicant has alleged that when he approached before the Tribunal by way of OA No 514 of 2012 seeking the benefits of regularization, the respondents got so aggrieved that without conducting any regular inquiry, vide order dated 14.09.2012, they terminated the services of the applicant. Applicant has contended that once he was granted temporary status, he could not have been terminated without conducting the proper inquiry and thus by way of both the OAs, the applicant seeks quashing of the order dated 14.09.2012 thereby directing the respondents to reinstate him with all consequential benefits and also regularize his services.

4. Heard learned counsel for the part