Lethargy Is Not an Exceptional Circumstance: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Striking Off of Defence for Delay in Filing Written Statement Vague Decree of Injunction Can’t Be Executed by Attaching Machines: Rajasthan High Court Strikes Down Execution Order Mere permission to join proceedings without allowing filing of written statement is illusory: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Ex Parte Proceedings Unregistered Power of Attorney Can’t Transfer Property: MP High Court Denies Title, Dismisses Ejectment Suit Mere Non-Recovery of Weapon Is Not Fatal When Circumstantial and Medical Evidence Prove Guilt Beyond Doubt: Allahabad High Court Failure to Examine Gazetted Officer and Magistrate Who Certified Seizure Goes to Root of Fair Trial Under NDPS Act : Calcutta High Court Tender Years Doctrine Is No Longer Good Law: Delhi High Court Slams Mother’s Custody Claim Built on Parental Alienation Negation of Bail is the Rule in NDPS Cases Involving Commercial Quantity: Himachal Pradesh High Court Denies Bail Single Stab Injury in Heat of Passion During Sudden Quarrel Is Not Murder: Kerala High Court Section 10 CPC Inapplicable To Labour Court Proceedings; Stay Of Individual Disputes Denied: Karnataka High Court 138 NI Act | Once Issuance and Signature on Cheque Are Admitted, Burden Shifts on Accused to Dislodge Statutory Presumption: Madras High Court Confession Cannot Substitute Proof: Bombay High Court Acquits Husband Convicted of Wife’s Murder "Sole Eyewitness Testimony, Corroborated by Medical and Recovery Evidence, Is Enough to Sustain Conviction Under Section 302 IPC: Allahabad High Court Partition Once Effected Cannot Be Reopened on Vague Allegations of Fraud: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Registered Family Partition Deed Cancellation of Land Acquisition Compensation Without Allegation or Hearing Is Arbitrary: Supreme Court Restores Compensation to Innocent Land Owner Whether Act Was in Discharge of Official Duty Is a Question of Fact — Magistrate, Not High Court, Must Decide: Supreme Court Restricts Writ Interference in BNSS Cases Section 175(4) BNSS | Affidavit Is Not Optional — Even Complaints Against Public Servants Must Follow Procedural Rigour: Supreme Court Magistrate Cannot Be Directed to Recall His Judicial Order by a Writ Court: Supreme Court Warns Against Article 226 Interference in Pending Criminal Proceedings Even In Absence of Written Demand, If Substantial Dispute Exists or Is Apprehended, Reference Under Section 10 ID Act Is Valid: Supreme Court Absence of Classical Signs of Strangulation and Possibility of Hanging Nullifies Homicidal Theory: Supreme Court Holds Medical Evidence Alone Cannot Prove Guilt Confession Must Be Direct Acknowledgment of Guilt, Not Mere Presence at Scene: Supreme Court Slams Misuse of Section 164 CrPC Reversal of Acquittal Without Dislodging Trial Court’s Reasoning Is Impermissible: Supreme Court Restores Acquittal

Punjab and Haryana High Court Declares Termination  of the Lecturer  Without show cause notice Illegal, Orders Reinstatement

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


0n 5 July 2023, In a recent ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court declared the termination of services of a senior lecturer at Ansal Institute of Technology as illegal, ordering his immediate reinstatement. The court also directed the management to pay all notional benefits, including arrears of salary. The judgment, delivered by Justice Jaishree Thakur, emphasized the violation of Service Rules and Section 22 of the Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University Act, 1988.

The petitioner, Manoj Kumar Verma, had filed a writ petition seeking the quashing of the order dismissing his appeal against the termination and reinstatement with continuity of service. The court held that the termination was illegal as it failed to comply with the Service Rules and Section 22, which required a three-month notice or a show cause notice before termination.

Justice Jaishree Thakur, in her judgment, stated, “The termination of the petitioner’s services without issuing a show cause notice and solely relying on the appointment letter, which permits termination by giving three months’ notice, is illegal and deserves to be set aside.”

The court also rejected the respondents’ argument that the writ petition was not maintainable due to a previous civil suit filed by the petitioner. The civil suit was withdrawn with liberty to approach the Educational Tribunal, and the court held that the principle of res judicata did not apply.

“The principle of res judicata does not bar the writ petition as the civil suit was not decided on any issue,” Justice Jaishree Thakur stated.

The judgment further highlighted that the management had violated the Service Rules by terminating the petitioner’s services with only one month’s notice instead of the required three months. The court directed the management to reinstate the petitioner immediately, along with all notional benefits.

This judgment holds significance as it reaffirms the importance of following due process and ensuring the protection of employees’ rights. It serves as a reminder to educational institutions to adhere to the prescribed rules and regulations governing the termination of services.

Date of Decision: 5th July 2023.

Manoj Kumar Verma vs Management Board of Ansal Institute of Technology & others

Latest Legal News