Court’s Decision:
The Chhattisgarh High Court quashed the termination order issued against the petitioner, citing the failure of the authorities to follow the due procedure under the Circular/Scheme dated 02.04.2008. The court granted liberty to the Chief Executive Officer of Janpad Panchayat to take appropriate action as per the procedure prescribed in paragraphs 13.1 to 13.3 of the said Circular.
Facts:
The petitioner, a worker under the Integrated Child Development Services, was terminated by the Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Kawardha, without being given a reasonable opportunity to be heard. The petitioner challenged the termination on the grounds that the procedure laid down by the Circular/Scheme dated 02.04.2008, issued by the Women and Child Development Department, Chhattisgarh, had not been followed.
Issues:
- Whether the termination of the petitioner was in violation of the principles of natural justice.
- Whether the respondents failed to adhere to the prescribed procedure under the Circular/Scheme dated 02.04.2008.
Petitioner’s Arguments:
The petitioner argued that her termination was in violation of the principles of natural justice, as she was not given an opportunity to present her case or respond to the charges against her. She also contended that the procedure outlined in the Circular/Scheme dated 02.04.2008 was not followed by the authorities, making the termination order illegal.
Respondent’s Arguments:
The State, represented by the counsel, argued that the termination was lawful and the necessary procedure had been followed. They supported the decision of the Chief Executive Officer and opposed the petitioner’s claims.
Analysis of the Law:
The court examined the relevant provisions of the Circular/Scheme dated 02.04.2008, particularly paragraphs 13.1 to 13.3, which outline the procedure for termination. The law mandates that before any termination, the employee must be given a reasonable opportunity to be heard and a thorough inquiry should be conducted.
Precedent Analysis:
The court did not refer to any previous judgments but focused on the compliance with the procedural requirements set forth in the Circular/Scheme dated 02.04.2008.
Court’s Reasoning:
The court found that the procedure required under the Circular/Scheme was not adhered to by the respondents. The findings were vague, and there was no evidence of a proper inquiry or an opportunity for the petitioner to present her case. The court emphasized the importance of following the principles of natural justice and the specific procedures laid out in the Circular.
Conclusion:
The High Court quashed the termination order dated 30.05.2016, reserving the liberty for the Chief Executive Officer to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with the procedure prescribed in the Circular/Scheme. The court disposed of the writ petition with this direction.
Implications:
This decision reinforces the importance of following the due process and the principles of natural justice in administrative actions, particularly in cases of termination. The ruling highlights the requirement for authorities to strictly adhere to prescribed procedures before taking any punitive action against employees.
