Unfair Termination Due to Conduct Inquiry Without Officer’s Knowledge Violates Natural Justice: Delhi HC
Case Title: GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS v. VIRENDER
Case No: W.P.(C) 12696/2023, CM APPL. 50153/2023
Decided on: February 28, 2024
Quorum: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO and HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA
Facts of the case
On June 29, 2016, Virender was hired as a Warder by the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board, and he was placed on two years of probation. He was found in possession of forbidden items on April 11, 2017, and a FIR was filed in accordance with the NDPS Act sections. On April 24, 2017, his services were terminated in accordance with CCS (Temporary Services) Rules, 19651, Rule 5(1).
Issues
Whether Virender was entitled to protection under Article 311 of the Indian Constitution and whether the termination of his services was lawful?
Legal Provisions
The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act of 1985, Article 311 of the Indian Constitution, and Rule 5 of the CCS (Temporary Service) Rules, 19651 were all relevant in this case.
Appellant’s Contentions
The appellants contended that Virender’s employment termination was lawful since he was discovered in possession of prohibited items, which called for prompt action. They argued that the action done was compliant with the regulations governing the employee’s probationary status and temporary service. The appellants highlighted that Virender’s services should have been terminated due to the seriousness of the charges against him, without the need for a thorough investigation.
Respondent’s Contentions
Because the termination was predicated on an incident that was still being investigated by the police, Virender argued that it was speculative and premature. He claimed that because he was not given an opportunity to present a fair defense, the termination was against the fundamentals of natural justice. In addition, the respondent stated that his termination did not take into account his claim to protection under Article 311 of the Constitution.
Court Analysis and Judgement
The court considered whether due process was observed and examined the conditions surrounding the termination. It investigated whether Article 311 and the 1965 CCS (Temporary Services) Rules applied to the case. The court assessed the validity of the termination order by taking into account earlier rulings and legal precedents. In the end, the Delhi High Court overturned Virender’s termination order and maintained the Central Administrative Tribunal’s ruling. The court’s ruling was supported by a careful analysis of the relevant legal provisions, the arguments made by each party, and the natural justice principles.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Judgement Analysis Written by – K.Immey Grace