The Jabalpur bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court has overturned the termination of a Junior Assistant employed on a contractual basis with the Madhya Pradesh Road Development Corporation (MPRDC). The court ruled that the employee’s termination was unjustified, as it was based solely on the registration of a criminal case without following proper legal procedures.
Court Questions Termination Over Criminal Case
The petitioner, employed as a Junior Assistant since 2011, had his services terminated in April 2022 after being implicated in a bribery case. However, the court pointed out that the Madhya Pradesh Sadak Vikas Nigam (Sewa Bharti Tatha Sewa Sharten) Niyam, 2016 does not include any provision allowing termination solely on the basis of a registered criminal case.
No Grounds for Termination Without Investigation
Justice Sanjay Dwivedi, in his ruling, emphasized that the termination was a harsh action, especially since the rules clearly state that a major penalty like dismissal or termination can only be imposed after a conviction in a criminal case. The registration of a criminal case, without further investigation or conviction, does not justify immediate termination.
Contractual Termination Rules Misinterpreted
The court highlighted that under the agreement between the employee and the corporation, the services could be terminated with one month’s notice or salary. However, the court clarified that this clause cannot be used arbitrarily or as a tool for dismissing employees without a valid reason. The court underscored that such termination should follow Madhya Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966, which require a proper inquiry.
Principles of Natural Justice Violated
The High Court stressed that the corporation’s decision violated the principles of natural justice. Terminating an employee’s service without due cause, or simply based on a clause in the contract, does not give the employer the right to act arbitrarily. The employee must be given an opportunity for a fair hearing, and the termination should be based on valid reasons.
Petitioner Entitled to Wages for Time Lost
As a result of the ruling, the petitioner is entitled to receive wages for the period he was out of work due to the wrongful termination. The court’s decision reinstates the employee and holds the corporation accountable for failing to follow due process.
