In a significant development, the Supreme Court has set aside the High Court’s decision in the case of a contractual appointment involving a conductor’s termination. The dispute, which began when the respondent challenged their termination, has finally seen a resolution. Stay tuned for more details on the case as we delve into the implications of the Supreme Court’s ruling.
Facts
- The appellant appointed the respondent as a conductor on a contractual basis on 21 January 2006.
- The contract stipulated that the appointment was for one year or until the shortage of drivers was met, whichever was earlier.
- The services of the respondent were terminated on 21 March 2007.
- The respondent challenged the termination through a writ petition, which was allowed by a Single Judge of the Rajasthan High Court on 6 April 2016.
- The writ appeal against the decision was dismissed by a Division Bench of the High Court on 19 September 2016.
- The only ground for allowing the writ petition was a breach of the principle of natural justice.
Also Read: Anticipatory Bail Application in Different Cases: Landmark Judgment by the Supreme Court of India
Arguments
- Nature of the appointment was purely contractual for a period of one year or until the shortage of drivers was met, whichever was earlier.
- The contract stipulated that the services of the appellant could be dispensed with without any notice.
Also Read: Supreme Court of India Dismisses Writ Petition on Arms Export to Israel
Analysis
- Respondent was on a purely contractual appointment
- Services could be dispensed with without notice at any stage
- The submission regarding the terms of the appointment was found to be meritorious
- The learned Single Judge of the High Court did not rely on the decision in Hari Ram Maurya v Union of India and others.
- The case in question involved the removal of a temporary employee based on a charge of bribery.
- The Court found that the employee was guilty of bribery, justifying the removal.
- Given the terms of the contractual engagement, the appellant’s action of removing the employee was deemed justified.
Also Read: National Task Force for Healthcare Safety: Ensuring Dignity and Protection for Medical Professionals
Decision
- The appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment and order of the High Court is set aside.
- As a result, the writ petition filed by Original Name shall stand dismissed.
- No order has been passed as to costs in this matter.
Case Title: RAJASTHAN STATE ROADWAYS TRANSPORT CORPORATION Vs. PARAMJEET SINGH
Case Number: C.A. No.-004593-004593 / 2019
