Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 103
PATNA HIGH COURT
HARISH KUMAR, J
Abhimanyu Kumar – Appellant
Versus
The Life Insurance Corporation Of India – Respondent
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.905 of 2019
For the Appellants/Petitioners:Mr. Bindhyachal Singh, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Satya Prakash, Advocate, Ms. Smriti Singh, Advocate
For the Respondents:Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Abhimanyu Vatsa, Advocate, Mr. Rajni Kant singh, Advocate, Mr. Sameer Prakash, Advocate
An employee's performance appraisals must be communicated timely; failure to do so denies the right to improve and violates principles of natural justice.
Headnote:(A) Life Insurance Corporation of India Development Officers (Revision of certain terms and conditions of service) Rules, 2009 - Termination of services on grounds of poor performance - Service cannot be terminated without providing performance appraisal and opportunity for improvement - Communication of appraisal results is required for fairness and natural justice. (Paras 8, 20-24, 30)
(B) Statutory obligation - Non-communication of performance appraisal deprives an employee of the opportunity to improve their work performance, violating principles of natural justice. (Paras 25-30)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner was appointed as a Development Officer after selection and completion of training. He was terminated based on performance appraisals for past years that were communicated late, denying him the chance to address deficiencies.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the delays in communicating performance appraisals violated the petitioner's rights and ruled the termination order was unlawful.
Issues: The primary issues were whether the late communication of performance appraisals violated the petitioner's rights and if the termination was lawful.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that every employee must be made aware of their performance evaluations in a timely manner to facilitate their chances for improvement and challenge unjust appraisals.
Result: The writ petition is allowed, and the termination orders are set aside, reinstating the petitioner without remuneration for the interim period.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of petitioner's employment and termination. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. arguments on procedural fairness in performance evaluation. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. court analysis on communication of performance evaluations. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 4. court's directive to reinstate petitioner. (Para 31) |
| 5. conclusion and order of dismissal of costs. (Para 32 , 33) |
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 20-01-2025
Heard Mr. Bindhyachal Singh, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Abhimanyu Vats, learned Advocate for the Life Insurance Corporation of India.
2. The petitioner is aggrieved with the order dated 03.06.2017 issued under the signature of Zonal Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India, East Central Zone, Patna whereby the services of the petitioner as Development Officer has been terminated from the date of receipt of the order in terms of the provisions of Life Insurance Corporation of India Development Officers (Revision of certain terms and conditions of service) Rules, 2009 . The petitioner also prays for quashing of the order dated 17.07.2018 issued by the Managing Director, Life Insurance Corporation, Central Office, Mumbai whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order of termination also came to rejected.
3. The short facts, which led to the filing of the present writ petition are that after facing prescribed selection process, the petitioner was selected for the post of Apprentice Development Officer by the Life Insurance Corporation of India (hereinafter referred to as ‘LIC’) on 14.12.2010.
4. On being selected, the petitioner has also completed the requisite training successfully and thereupon he was appointed as Probationary Development Officer vide letter dated 14.05.2011. Having completed the probationary period successfully, the service of the petitioner was confirmed with effect from 15.11.2012, vide letter dated 14.12.2012, the copy of which is marked as Annexure P/4 to the writ petition. The said letter clearly indicated that the work of the petitioner will again be reviewed at the end of twelve months from the date of his confirmation. Furthermore, the services of the petitioner is to be governed by LIC (Staff Regulation, 1960) now in force and amended from time to time and as per the provision of LIC Development Officers (Revision of certain terms and conditions of service) Rules, 2009.
5. Despite the direction for review of the work of the petitioner, no appraisal letter was served upon the petitioner in the year 2013, 2014 and 2015. It is the contention of the petitioner that for the period 01.12.2012 to 30.11.2013, 01.12.2013 to 30.11.2014 and 01.12.2014 to 30.11.2015 were settled in October, 2016. It is rather unfortunate that despite the aforesaid fact all of a sudden, the petitioner has served upon two letters, both dated 08.11.2016, issued under the signature of Senior Divisional Manager, Bhagalpur wherein the petitioner’s performance for appraisal year 2012-13 and 2013-14 issued indicating deficient work performance of the petitioner, seeking show cause as to why the service of the petitioner be not terminated in terms of Sub-Rule 7 of the Life Insurance Corporation of India (Revision of certain terms and conditions of service) Rules, 2009. The petitioner immediately responded to the show-cause letters both dated 08.11.2016 on 12.12.2016 with an undertaking to perform well within subscribed cost limit for the year 2016-17.
6. Notwithstanding the exhaustive show-cause reply of the petitioner and an undertaking to perform well within the subscribed cost limit for the year 2016-17, the impugned order of termination came to be passed.
7. Aggrieved with the order of termination, the petitioner preferred memo of appeal before the Managing Director, LIC of India, Central Office, Mumbai with a prayer to revoke the order of termination by raising several ground therein. However, the same
