Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

Punjab and Haryana High Court Grants Financial Benefits to Employee, Sets Aside Decision Treating Suspension and Dismissal Period as Non-Duty Period

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled in favor of an employee, Mr. R.N. Uppal, by granting him financial benefits and setting aside a decision that treated his suspension and dismissal period as non-duty period. The judgment was delivered by Ms. Jaishree Thakur, J.

Mr. Uppal, who was employed by the Haryana State Federation of Consumers Co-operative Wholesale Stores Ltd. (Confed), had filed a writ petition seeking the quashing of a decision that denied him financial benefits for the period of suspension and dismissal. The petitioner had objected to the purchase procedure approved by the Managing Director and had refused to sign quotations, which ultimately led to his suspension and subsequent dismissal on charges of insubordination and disobedience of orders.

However, the High Court noted that the petitioner's act of objecting to the purchase procedure did not amount to insubordination or prejudice against the federation. The court further highlighted that the petitioner's integrity was never in question, as acknowledged by the Board of Directors. The termination order was subsequently modified to a minor penalty of warning, resulting in Mr. Uppal's reinstatement with certain conditions.

Citing precedents, including the case of Deepali Gundu Surwase v. Kranti Junior Adhyapak Mahavidyalaya, the court applied an equitable approach in determining the extent of financial benefits. It emphasized that reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages is the normal rule in cases of wrongful termination. The court also emphasized the burden on the employer to provide evidence if they seek to avoid full back wages.

High Court held that the petitioner's termination was motivated by his objections to the purchase procedure and that the modification of his punishment to a minor penalty of warning indicated acceptance of his appeal. Therefore, the court allowed the writ petition, set aside the decision treating the suspension and dismissal period as non-duty period for financial benefits, and declared Mr. Uppal entitled to all financial benefits, including leave encashment, EPF, ACP, and increments, as per the relevant rules.

This judgment reaffirming the principles of fairness and equitable treatment in employment matters, particularly in cases of alleged insubordination or disobedience. It highlights the need for employers to act with utmost fairness and avoid undue duress when seeking undertakings from employees in lieu of reinstatement. The judgment also underscores the court's role in ensuring that employees receive their rightful dues in cases of wrongful termination.

Date of Decision: 26th May 2023

R.N Uppal vs Haryana State Federation of Consumers Co-operative Wholesale Stores Ltd. (Confed)

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/R-N-Uppal-Vs-State-26-May-23-PH-HC.pdf"]

Latest Legal News