Advocates:
M. K. DUA

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Page 1 of 7

CASE NO.:

Appeal (civil) 5064 of 2007

PETITIONER:

State of Haryana & Ors

RESPONDENT:

Navneet Verma

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 31/10/2007

BENCH:

Tarun Chatterjee & P. Sathasivam

JUDGMENT:

JUDGMENT

(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 23499 OF 2004)

P. Sathasivam, J.

1) Leave granted.

2) Whether the abolition of the post has been done in

good faith or whether it is a camouflage to cover up and

conceal the real intention of weeding out the respondent

from service is the only question to be decided in this

appeal.

BRIEF FACTS:

3) The respondent-herein was appointed as Accounts

Executive in the Haryana Bureau of Pubic Enterprises (in

short \021the HBPE\022) on 16.07.1993. While continuing so, his

services were terminated on 31.12.1994 on the ground that

the post of Accounts Executive has been abolished.

According to the respondent-herein, the third appellant

applied for the post of Financial Adviser. Even though she

did not fulfill the prescribed requirement of three years

experience after doing chartered accountancy, she had been

appointed as Financial Adviser and the respondent-herein

who was appointed as Accounts Executive was required to

report to her due to which she wanted him to work as her

personal staff. He did not carry out petty directions. When

he brought these facts to the notice of the Member

Secretary, HBPE, he wanted him to resign the job. The

Member Secretary and the Financial Adviser seemed to have

different attitude and started planning to eliminate him.

Having no other option, on 26.07.1994, he made a

representation to the then Chief Minister of Haryana. In the

meanwhile, the Financial Adviser \026 third appellant herein

lodged a false and baseless complaint against him to the

Member Secretary. Based on the complaint of the Financial

Adviser, a preliminary inquiry was conducted. However, no

action was taken against him on the basis of the report of

the Inquiry Officer. But instead of taking any action, in

accordance with law, his services have been dispensed with

consequent upon the abolition of the posts of Accounts

Executives.

4) According to the respondent, there is no

justification for abolition of the posts of Accounts Executive

and it was done with a malafide intention to dispense with

his services without any basis. Though two posts of

Accounts Executives were advertised, only one post was

filled up by appointing him. Thus, according to him, the

post was not abolished in good faith, but this was a device

to weed him out from service. Therefore, the order of

termination on the ground of abolition of post is liable to be

set aside.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Page 2 of 7

5) It is the case of Haryana Government and HBPE

that the abolition of posts of Accounts Executives was not

done with malafide intention or extraneous reasons.

According to them, in January, 1994, it was felt that the

work of Bureau was not being performed as per official

requirements and it required restructuring of the staff vis-‘-

vis the work load of the Bureau and it was observed that

the contribution of two posts of Accounts Executives,

especially, when there are two posts of Accountants were

not result oriented and the work could smoothly be carried

out on even without the two posts of Accounts Executives.

It was further stated that the Accountants can send their

case directly to the Financial Advisor, who was the head of

the financial wing in giving advice regarding financial offers.

Consequently, two posts of Accounts Executives were

abolished and services of the respondent were terminated

as he was no longer required.

6) Though a complaint was received from the Financial

Adviser regarding mis-behaviour by the respondent-herein,

preliminary inquiry was conducted into the allegations

made, but no action was taken and t