Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

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