Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query!
Scanned Judgements…!
Temporary posts and natural justice - The law clearly states that even if a post is temporary, the services of the employee cannot be terminated arbitrarily or in a punitive manner without following the principles of natural justice. For instance, it is emphasized that a probationer, like a temporary servant, is also entitled to certain protection and his services cannot be terminated arbitrarily, nor can those services be terminated in a punitive manner without complying with the principles of natural justice [Director, CSIR-CIMFR [Central Institute of Mining and Fuel Research] VS Mayuresh Dash, S/o. Sri Rabindra Kumar Dash - Jharkhand](https://supremetoday.ai/doc/judgement/02000033748). Similarly, the order of termination being stigmatic and passed without following the principles of natural justice will be illegal, arbitrary ["Purusottam Swain vs State of Odisha - Orissa"].
Right to fair hearing - The principle of audi alteram partem (hear the other side) is fundamental to natural justice. Orders that are stigmatic or punitive, especially if based on misconduct, must be preceded by an opportunity to be heard. Since in the case at hand, petitioner came to be terminated on account of her continuous absence, order of termination being stigmatic and punitive could not have been passed without adhering to the principle of natural justice which also includes opportunity of being heard ["Darshana Kumari vs State of Himachal Pradesh - Himachal Pradesh"]. This is reinforced by rulings that no order for post abolition passed and when the matter is subjudice, post cannot be abolished at all ["Gottipati Geetha VS State Of Andhra Pradesh - Andhra Pradesh"].
Temporary posts and legal protections - Even for temporary or probationary employees, the services cannot be terminated without following due process, especially when the termination is stigmatic or punitive. A probationer, like a temporary servant, is also entitled to certain protection and his services cannot be terminated arbitrarily, nor can those services be terminated in a punitive manner without complying with the principles of natural justice [Director, CSIR-CIMFR [Central Institute of Mining and Fuel Research] VS Mayuresh Dash, S/o. Sri Rabindra Kumar Dash - Jharkhand](https://supremetoday.ai/doc/judgement/02000033748). Similarly, the services of confirmed employees cannot be terminated without initiating a regular departmental proceeding and following the cardinal principle of natural justice ["Harendra Kumar VS State of Jharkhand - Jharkhand"].
Termination without following natural justice is unlawful - Many cases highlight that dismissals or terminations made without prior notice or opportunity violate natural justice principles. Order of termination has been issued without following the principles of natural justice ["Purusottam Swain vs State of Odisha - Orissa"], and no opportunity of hearing is afforded to the petitioner and thus, the order suffers from a violation of principles of natural justice ["S B T S Devi VS State Of Andhra Pradesh - Andhra Pradesh"]. Such violations render the termination illegal and arbitrary.
Summary - Overall, the jurisprudence consistently affirms that even for temporary or probationary posts, termination must adhere to the principles of natural justice, including fair hearing and proper procedure. Arbitrary or stigmatic dismissals without following these principles are unlawful, emphasizing the importance of fairness in administrative and service matters [Director, CSIR-CIMFR [Central Institute of Mining and Fuel Research] VS Mayuresh Dash, S/o. Sri Rabindra Kumar Dash - Jharkhand](https://supremetoday.ai/doc/judgement/02000033748) ["Dr. (Mrs. ) Pulcheria John Haro ] (in 1000) Dr. (Mrs. ) Ratna Banerjee (in 1042) VS State of Jharkhand - 2011 0 Supreme(Jhk) 31"] ["Darshana Kumari vs State of Himachal Pradesh - Himachal Pradesh"].
References:- [Director, CSIR-CIMFR [Central Institute of Mining and Fuel Research] VS Mayuresh Dash, S/o. Sri Rabindra Kumar Dash - Jharkhand](https://supremetoday.ai/doc/judgement/02000033748)- ["Akash Nayak, S/o Shri Shyamlal Nayak VS State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Panchayat & Gramin Vikas Vibhag - Chhattisgarh"]- ["Darshana Kumari vs State of Himachal Pradesh - Himachal Pradesh"]- ["Punjab Wakf Board VS Mohammad Shakeel - Punjab and Haryana"]- ["Harendra Kumar VS State of Jharkhand - Jharkhand"]- ["Vembati Ranjith Kumar VS State of Telangana - Telangana"]- ["Jitendriya Mohanty vs State of Odisha - Orissa"]- ["State of Odisha VS Dilip Kumar Mohapatra - Supreme Court"]- ["Gottipati Geetha VS State Of Andhra Pradesh - Andhra Pradesh"]- ["Prey Khyora Riyang VS State Of A. P. - Gauhati"]- ["S B T S Devi VS State Of Andhra Pradesh - Andhra Pradesh"]- ["Purusottam Swain vs State of Odisha - Orissa"]- ["Jayanta Kumar Sarma S/o Late Debendra Nath Sarma VS Krishna Kanta Handique State Open University, Represented By The Registrar - Gauhati"]- ["Ran Bahadur Singh vs Union of India, Ministry of Industry - Central Administrative Tribunal"]- ["Naijel Shane Phillips @ Nigel Phillips S/o H. E. Phillips VS Managing Committee through Leader of Management-cum-Appointing Authority, Smt. Daljeet Kaur, Guru Govind Singh Public School - Jharkhand"]- ["FAQEER CHAND vs HIGH COURT OF HP - Himachal Pradesh"]- ["Shubhadra Kumari @ Subhadra Devi VS State of Bihar - Patna"]- ["PARMESHWAR SINGH @ PARMESHWAR VS STATE Of BIHAR - 1970 0 Supreme(Pat) 22"]
In the world of employment law, particularly in India, the termination of temporary workers like choukidars (watchmen or guards) often sparks debate. A common question arises: Choukidar being a temporary post cannot be terminated without following principle of natural justice. Is this absolutely true? The answer isn't black and white. While temporary appointments may allow for simpler terminations under certain conditions, courts have repeatedly emphasized protections against arbitrary or punitive actions. This blog post breaks down the legal standards, key judicial precedents, and practical implications for employers and employees alike.
Disclaimer: This article provides general information based on legal precedents and is not a substitute for professional legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for specific cases.
Temporary posts, such as those for choukidars, are typically governed by the terms of the appointment letter, relevant service rules, and statutes like the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Courts distinguish between straightforward terminations (e.g., expiry of term or simple non-renewal) and those that appear punitive or stigmatic.
If the appointment explicitly states it's temporary and terminable without notice, such actions are often upheld. For instance, if the terms of appointment explicitly state that the employment is temporary and subject to termination without notice, then such termination is generally permissible PARMESHWAR SINGH @ PARMESHWAR VS STATE Of BIHAR - 1970 0 Supreme(Pat) 22. In the Bihar Town Planning case, the court confirmed that a Chief Engineer had authority to terminate without notice or pay in lieu, as per the explicit terms PARMESHWAR SINGH @ PARMESHWAR VS STATE Of BIHAR - 1970 0 Supreme(Pat) 22.
However, this doesn't give employers a free pass. Temporary status doesn't mean zero protections.
Principles of natural justice—primarily audi alteram partem (right to be heard) and nemo judex in causa sua (no bias)—kick in when termination is based on allegations of misconduct, poor performance, or other stigmatic reasons. Even for temporary or probationary employees, arbitrary or punitive dismissal is frowned upon.
The Supreme Court in V.P. Ahuja stressed that even temporary employees are entitled to protection against arbitrary dismissal Rohidas Ganpat Godse VS The Principal, G. B. Khare College - 2011 0 Supreme(Bom) 324. Similarly, the Supreme Court has emphasized that even for temporary or probationary employees, the principles of natural justice—such as providing an opportunity to be heard—must be observed unless the appointment explicitly states otherwise Rohidas Ganpat Godse VS The Principal, G. B. Khare College - 2011 0 Supreme(Bom) 324.
Supporting this, another ruling notes: It is a well settled proposition of law that even a probationer has protection against the arbitrary termination and probationer is also entitled to certain protection. The service of temporary employee cannot be terminated arbitrarily or punitively without applying the principle of natural justice Jogender VS Union of India - 2020 Supreme(P&H) 590. In that Central Reserve Police Force case, a temporary constable's termination for alleged desertion was set aside for lacking a show-cause notice or inquiry Jogender VS Union of India - 2020 Supreme(P&H) 590.
Even for temporary roles:- Notice: Generally not required if terms specify no notice needed. Otherwise, a notice period or pay in lieu applies PARMESHWAR SINGH @ PARMESHWAR VS STATE Of BIHAR - 1970 0 Supreme(Pat) 22.- Competent Authority: Termination must come from the appointing power or delegate. Unauthorized orders are invalid PARMESHWAR SINGH @ PARMESHWAR VS STATE Of BIHAR - 1970 0 Supreme(Pat) 22.- No Lien on Post: The plaintiff was put in service on temporary basis and it is settled law that a temporary employee has no lien on the post and can be terminated at any point of time Haryana State VS Lakhender Prakash (Died) through LRs. - 2024 Supreme(P&H) 53. Civil courts often lack jurisdiction for Industrial Disputes Act claims in such cases Haryana State VS Lakhender Prakash (Died) through LRs. - 2024 Supreme(P&H) 53.
| Aspect | Standard for Temporary Choukidars | Key Reference ||-------------------------|----------------------------------------------------|------------------------|| Appointment Type | Terminable without notice if explicit | PARMESHWAR SINGH @ PARMESHWAR VS STATE Of BIHAR - 1970 0 Supreme(Pat) 22 || Authority | Must be by competent officer | PARMESHWAR SINGH @ PARMESHWAR VS STATE Of BIHAR - 1970 0 Supreme(Pat) 22 || Notice/Pay in Lieu | Not required per terms; otherwise yes | PARMESHWAR SINGH @ PARMESHWAR VS STATE Of BIHAR - 1970 0 Supreme(Pat) 22 || Natural Justice | Required if punitive/stigmatic | Rohidas Ganpat Godse VS The Principal, G. B. Khare College - 2011 0 Supreme(Bom) 324 || Arbitrary Dismissal | Illegal; follow due process | Rohidas Ganpat Godse VS The Principal, G. B. Khare College - 2011 0 Supreme(Bom) 324 |
In cases like union disputes, failure to hold inquiries before termination has led to awards being set aside Workmen, represented by ACGL Workers' Union VS Messrs Automobile Corporation of Goa Ltd. - 2015 Supreme(Bom) 882.
For Employers:- Review appointment letters meticulously.- Use neutral language in termination orders to avoid stigma.- Conduct brief inquiries for performance/misconduct issues.- Document everything to defend against challenges.
For Employees/Choukidars:- Check your appointment terms.- Challenge punitive terminations via labour courts or writ petitions.- Note: After 240 days, retrenchment compensation may apply under Industrial Disputes Act, but civil courts may not have jurisdiction Haryana State VS Lakhender Prakash (Died) through LRs. - 2024 Supreme(P&H) 53.
Employers should tread carefully to avoid reinstatement orders and back wages. Employees, know your rights—temporary doesn't mean unprotected. For tailored guidance, reach out to a labour law expert.
Sources:PARMESHWAR SINGH @ PARMESHWAR VS STATE Of BIHAR - 1970 0 Supreme(Pat) 22Rohidas Ganpat Godse VS The Principal, G. B. Khare College - 2011 0 Supreme(Bom) 324Haryana State VS Lakhender Prakash (Died) through LRs. - 2024 Supreme(P&H) 53Jogender VS Union of India - 2020 Supreme(P&H) 590Workmen, represented by ACGL Workers' Union VS Messrs Automobile Corporation of Goa Ltd. - 2015 Supreme(Bom) 882H. Shivakumar VS Director & Commissioner of Municipal Administration - 2015 Supreme(Kar) 43Rajesh Kumar Shukla VS State of Uttar Pradesh - 2005 Supreme(All) 666
#EmploymentLaw #NaturalJustice #LabourRights
![Director, CSIR-CIMFR [Central Institute of Mining and Fuel Research] VS Mayuresh Dash, S/o. Sri Rabindra Kumar Dash - 2024 Supreme(Jhk) 43](https://supremetoday-s3.b-cdn.net/Jharkhand_3.png)
held that “a probationer, like a temporary servant, is also entitled to certain protection and his services cannot be terminated arbitrarily, nor can those services be terminated in a punitive manner without complying with the principles of natural justice” 32. ... The said punitive order if allowed to be operated without providing an opportunity of hearing to the party concerned, then such party will be condemned without providing ....
There is a common thread that the principle of natural justice is not unruly horse. The principles of natural justice are required to be complied with, having regard to the facts situation obtained therein. ... Since the petitioners did not possess the requisite educational qualification for holding the post of Sub Engineer (Civil), compliance of principle of natural justice before termination of their services would be nothing but ....
natural justice. ... Since in the case at hand, petitioner came to be terminated on account of her continuous absence, order of termination being stigmatic and punitive could not have been passed without adhering to the principle of natural justice which also includes opportunity of being heard. ... Onkar Jairath, Advocate representing the petitioner is that the impugned order dated 14.1.2020 has been passed in violation of principle of nat....
The principle of audi alteram partem, which mandates that no one shall be condemned unheard, is part of the rules of natural justice. ... Natural justice is a great humanising principle intended to invest law with fairness and to secure justice and over the years it has grown into a widely pervasive rule affecting large areas of administrative action. ... been condemned unheard and the order has been in gross violation of principles of natural #HL_S....
Since the petitioners have worked for more than 29 long years as confirmed employees and received the benefits of Assured Career Progression, they cannot be ousted without initiating a regular departmental proceeding and following the cardinal principle of natural justice. ... principle of natural justice by a State action is a violation of Article 14. ... Learned counsel further argues that the respondents were pre-determined to te....
) of TS State and Subordinate Service Rules 1996 and is subjected to be terminated without any prior notice and without assigning any reason, subject to verification and outcome of his character and antecedents. ... When the historic document was made at Runnymede in 1215, the first statutory recognition of this principle b found its way into the "Magna Carta". The classic exposition of Sir Edward Coke of natural justice requires to "vocate, interrogate and adjudicate". In the celebrat....
It is the contention of the Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner that the impugned termination order has been issued by the Opposite Party No.2 without following the well-established principles of natural justice. ... Except in these two cases the appointment to a post, permanent or temporary, on probation or on an officiating basis or a substantive appointment to a temporary post gives to the servant so appointed no right to the post#....
In view of such admitted position and placing reliance on the decisions as cited (supra), this Court finds that the impugned order of termination has been issued in violation of the principle of natural justice as well as without assigning any reason. ... Per contra, the learned counsel for the first respondent submitted: (i) The disengagement was without assigning any reason and as such was arbitrary. Moreover, it was in violation of the principles of natural justice....
If the dealership is terminated without following the principles of natural justice, invariably, stigma of bad conduct imputed against such dealer (either temporary or permanent one) will remain forever and he will not have an opportunity to establish his innocence. ... Therefore, the 2nd respondent cannot just terminate the authorization of the petitioner without conducting enquiry on the pretext of her being a temporary dealer. It....
The plaintiff was put in service on temporary basis and it is settled law that a temporary employee has no lien on the post and can be terminated at any point of time. ... It is not in dispute that the appellant was appointed on a temporary basis, his services could be terminated without notice and without assigning any reason within a period of one year in fact, his services were terminated within a period of one year under Rule 5(....
It is a well settled proposition of law that even a probationer has protection against the arbitrary termination and probationer is also entitled to certain protection. The service of temporary employee cannot be terminated arbitrarily or punitively without applying the principle of natural justice.
Accordingly, without holding any inquiry and without following the principle of natural justice, the services of the petitioners were terminated. But however, no inquiry on such chargesheet was completed. Consequently, the Union raised a demand for reinstatement of the petitioners with all consequential benefits somewhere on 25.08.1986. As the management was not accepting the demands, the same were carried before the Labour Commissioner in conciliation and such demands were pending in conciliation.
A probationer, like a temporary servant, is also entitled to certain protection and his services cannot be terminated in a punitive manner without complying with the principle of natural justice. Therefore without enquiry under Rule 7 of Probation rules read with KCS (CC&A) Rules, 1957 passing of discharge order is illegal and arbitrary.
The termination by cancellation of appointments without giving opportunity of hearing was violative of principles of natural justice and as such the order is null and void. The cancellation of appointment of temporary employment not being terminated in accordance with terms and conditions of appointment, the principles of natural justice must be followed. This division Benchs judgment squarely covers the controversy raised in these petitions.
Therefore, impugned order of removal is required to be quashed and set aside. Instead of that, charge-sheet was issued by the respondent Bank in respect of the same irregularities, the petitioner, therefore, submitted his reply to the said charges and explained the irregularities and also requested the Bank to consider his case leniently and he may be continued in service, but the respondent Bank had not considered his reply to the charge-sheet in its proper perspective and without conducting regular departmental inquiry against the petitioner straightway passed the impugned order of removal....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
