0

The petition in which the engagement of the petitioner as Driver has been dispensed with is dismissed: High Court of Delhi

The challenge in this petition is to an office order by which the engagement of the petitioner as Driver in the respondent No.2 has been dispensed with. I do not see any reason to interfere with the impugned decision and grant the prayer, as sought for by the petitioner in this petition. The petition is dismissed was upheld by the High Court Of Delhi through the learned bench led by HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO in the case of ISRAR AHMED Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. (W.P.(C) 9119/2017 & CM APPL. 37301/2017) on May 05, 2022.

Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Driver on contractual basis on July 20, 2002 and after a period of 15 years, his services have been terminated. The challenge in this petition is to an office order dated October 03, 2017 by which the engagement of the petitioner as Driver in the respondent No.2 has been dispensed with.

The learned Counsel for the petitioner has stated the reasoning given by the respondent in the impugned order is untenable. The only prayer which he has made is for reinstatement, as his services have been terminated without any rhyme or reason.

The learned counsel for National Commission for Women-respondent No.2 stated that pursuant to the decision, the matter was taken up in the meeting of the Commission held on September 20, 2017 and it was decided to disengage the services of drivers working on daily wage and obtain services for driving vehicles through an outsourcing agency. He stated that the petitioner was hired on daily wage basis to help the day to day work with effect from July 20, 2002. During the engagement of the petitioner on daily wage basis, time and again numerous complaints in respect of his services were received. Instead of taking an adverse action against him, the respondent No.2 took a lenient and humanitarian view and the services of the petitioner were changed to that of a Peon on daily wage basis and he continued to be engaged as a Peon with effect from June, 2016.

The Court observed that “ I do not see any reason to interfere with the impugned decision and grant the prayer, as sought for by the petitioner in this petition. The petition is dismissed. No costs.”

Click here to read the Judgement

Written by- Riya Singh, Legal Intern, Prime Legal

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Open chat