UDCPR | Municipal Authorities Empowered To Grant Relaxation For Recreational Open Spaces In Redevelopment Projects: Bombay High Court Appellate Court Can Enhance Compensation Under Motor Vehicles Act Even Without Cross-Appeal By Claimants: Allahabad High Court State Instrumentalities Cannot Supplement Reasons For Withholding Public Money Via Affidavits Years Later: Calcutta High Court Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act | Victim's Status As 'Illegal Immigrant' Does Not Dilute Offence Or Shield Perpetrator: Bombay High Court Clubbing Of Criminal Trials | No Basis To Direct Consolidation If Connected Proceedings Have Already Concluded: Delhi High Court IBC ‘Clean Slate’ Principle Cannot Extinguish Pre-existing Crystallized Liability Under Labour Awards: Bombay High Court Section 406 IPC | 'Donation' Does Not Constitute 'Entrustment'; Criminal Prosecution Quashed In Absence Of Aggrieved Victim: Delhi High Court Failure To Deliver Possession Of Plot Constitutes "Continuous Wrong" Giving Rise To Recurrent Cause Of Action Under Consumer Protection Act: Delhi State Commission High Court Cannot Entertain Writ Petition Under Article 226 When Statutory Appellate Remedy Under Section 107 CGST Act Is Available: Gujarat High Court Appointment Of Temple Servants Is The Exclusive Prerogative Of The Hereditary Trustee: Kerala High Court Stay Of Suit Proceedings Under CPC Does Not Automatically Bar Adjudication Of Pending Temporary Injunction Application: Rajasthan High Court Section 136A MV Act | Supreme Court Directs States To Impound Vehicles With Unpaid E-Challans And Mandates Electronic Enforcement Compliance Section 115 CPC | Executing Court Cannot Dismiss Execution Petition On Hyper-Technical Grounds Regarding LRs Of Judgment Debtor: Himachal Pradesh High Court Succession Act | Will Not Validly Executed If Attesting Witness Admits Signing Without Witnessing Testator’s Signature: Madras High Court High Court Cannot Interfere Under Article 227 To Correct Errors Of Fact Or Act As An Appellate Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court Advocates Act 1961 | Bar Council Has No Power To Suspend Advocate Pending Disciplinary Enquiry: Allahabad High Court Identification Of Accused By Police Personnel In Pitch Darkness Without Prior Acquaintance Is Unreliable: Himachal Pradesh High Court Body Shaming Or Insulting Physical Appearance Does Not Per Se Constitute Offence Under Section 509 IPC: Karnataka High Court Drishyam 3 | Interim Injunction To Restrain Film Release Cannot Be Granted Without Establishing Clear Subsisting Legal Right: Madras High Court Town Planning Scheme | Statutory Notice To Occupiers Under Rule 12(2)(a) Punjab Municipal Rules Is Mandatory And Independent Of Notice To Owner: Punjab & Haryana High Court

High Court Quashes Disengagement Orders of J&K Handicrafts Corporation Employees: ‘Principles of Natural Justice Require Opportunity of Representation’

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar has overturned the disengagement orders issued by the Managing Director of the J&K Handicrafts Corporation. The court’s landmark judgment, delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice M. A. Chowdhary, emphatically stated that “principles of natural justice require that they should be given a reasonable opportunity of representation,” setting a precedent in matters concerning the rights of contractual employees.

The case, WP(C) No. 2260/2022, which came to a conclusion on December 16, 2023, revolved around the petitioners, who were engaged on various contractual bases in the Corporation. They had challenged the legitimacy of their disengagement, which was executed following an alert note from the Anti Corruption Bureau (ACB).

In his detailed judgment, Justice Chowdhary observed that the disengagement of the petitioners was conducted without providing them an opportunity to be heard. This action was deemed as a violation of the principles of natural justice and potentially infringed upon Article 311 of the Constitution of India.

The Court’s decision to quash the disengagement orders has been hailed as a victory for employee rights, especially for those on contractual terms. The judgment also directs the respondents to reinstate the petitioners, allowing them to perform their duties and entitling them to all service benefits, including wages.

The case drew attention to the larger issue of contractual employment rights in the public sector. Senior Advocate Mr. Z.A. Qureshi, representing the petitioners, argued that the disengagement attached a stigma to the petitioners and was punitive without proper inquiry. Conversely, Mr. Abdul Rashid Malik, Sr.AAG, representing the respondents, contended that contractual employment does not confer a vested right to continue, citing the precedent set by the Apex Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka & Ors. Vs. Umadevi & Ors.

Justice Chowdhary, in his ruling, underscored the necessity for a full-fledged inquiry when allegations cast a stigma on employees. This judgment is expected to influence future cases concerning the termination of contractual employees in various sectors.

Date of Decision: 16.12.2023

Feroz Ahmed Sheikh VS Union Territory of J&K through

 

Latest Legal News