The Kerala High Court expounded that even if based on poor performance, the contract employees are terminated, a notice should have been issued to the employees. Without notice or finding in this regard, the employees cannot be terminated. Due process has to be followed for terminating the services of the contractual employees.
Brief Facts:
The present writ petition has been preferred to seek reliefs such as declaring the Petitioners entitled to continue in service as Attender and Part Time Sweeper and directing the Respondents to pass orders to this effect.
Contentions of the Petitioners:
It
was contended that Petitioners were appointed as Attenders and Part
Time Sweepers after a due selection process. The orders issued by the
Government provided that appointments made on a contractual basis cannot
be discontinued based on general order.
It was submitted that earlier Petitioner approached the Court when an attempt was made to terminate their services and the Court directed the Respondents to let Petitioners continue without prejudice to the right of the Municipality to engage contract employees. In this regard, an appeal was preferred by the Petitioners and the Court then directed that in case a representation is submitted by the Petitioners, the same shall be considered with a notice to the Municipality as well.
Thereafter, the services of the Petitioners were terminated vide an order stating that the Government orders relied on by the Petitioners are not applicable in the present case.
It was argued that the services were terminated on the ground of unsatisfactory performance without any kind of notice or opportunity to present the case.
Contentions of the Respondent No. 5:
It was argued that Petitioners are only contractual employees and hence, they do not have any indefeasible right to continue in service. It was contended that the appointment of the Petitioners was not as per the due process and therefore, there was no vested right with the Petitioners to seek the permanency of their service.
Observations of the Court:
It was observed that the Petitioners are contract employees and therefore, have no right to claim permanent employment. The ground for termination of their services was unsatisfactory performance.
The Bench opined that even if based on poor performance, the contract employees are terminated, a notice should have been issued to the employees. Without notice or finding in this regard, the employees cannot be terminated.
The decision of the Court:
The Kerala High Court based on the above reasons directed the Municipality to permit the Petitioners to continue in service and allowed the Municipality to take appropriate action against them only after issuing a due notice. Accordingly, the termination order was set aside.
Case Title: Tintu K. & Anr. v . Union of India & Ors.
Coram: Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Anu Sivaraman
Case No: WP (C) No. 26934 of 2022
Advocates for Petitioners: Advs. Kaleeswaram Raj, Shilpa Soman, Thulasi K. Raj
Advocates for Respondents: Advs. Smt. Mini Gopinath, Santharam. P
Social media is bold.
Social media is young.
Social media raises questions.
Social media is not satisfied with an answer.
Social media looks at the big picture.
Social media is interested in every detail.
social media is curious.
Social media is free.
Social media is irreplaceable.
But never irrelevant.
Social media is you.
(With input from news agency language)
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
0 Comments