SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 24830

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Sanjay K. Agrawal, J
I. Himika Rao – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
WPS No. 3939 of 2020



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Somkant Verma
For the Respondents: Amit Buxy

Termination of service without providing an opportunity of hearing to the employee constitutes a violation of the principles of natural justice, rendering the termination order void and liable to be set aside.

Headnote:(A) Principles of Natural Justice - Termination of Service - An order of termination passed without affording the affected party an opportunity of hearing is a violation of natural justice and is liable to be set aside. (Para 5)

Issues: Whether the termination of the petitioner's services without providing an opportunity of hearing was legally sustainable.

Table of Content
1. challenge to the termination of a compassionate appointment made without a prior hearing. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. termination orders passed in violation of the principles of natural justice are unsustainable. (Para 4 , 5 , 6)

Order On Board

1. This petition has been filed against the order dated 08.09.2020 (Annexure P/1) whereby respondent No.4 cancelled the order of the appointment of the petitioner.

2. Mr. Somkant Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that the father of the petitioner died in harness on 19.04.2016 while working as Assistant Teacher, thereafter, the petitioner moved an application for appointment on compassionate ground and she was appointed on compassionate ground on 19.08.2016 according to the policy of the compassionate appointment dated 14.06.2013 (Annexure P/5). He would also submit that After rendering service of four years, all of sudden by order dated 08.09.2020 (Annexure P/1) passed by respondent No.4, without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, services of the petitioner have terminated, therefore, the impugned order (Annexure P/1) is liable to be set aside.

3. Mr. Amit Buxy, learned State counsel, would oppose the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner and support the impugned order.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein above and gone through the records precisely.

5. Since there is a violation of principles of natural justice as the impugned termination order (Annexure P/1) was passed without affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the impugned termination order dated 08.09.2020 (Annexure P/1) is liable to be and is hereby set aside. However, respondents / competent authority is at liberty to pass fresh order after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties.

6. Consequently, this writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated herein above.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top