HC: Employee dismissal unsustainable if reasons for no inquiry not recorded

HC: Employee dismissal unsustainable if reasons for no inquiry not recorded

Ajay.Sura@timesgroup.com

Chandigarh:08.09.2020

The Punjab and Haryana high court has made it clear that the order of dismissal of an employee in absence of sufficient reasons recorded in writing dispensing with the requirement of holding inquiry into the person’s alleged misconduct is not sustainable.

The high court clarified that “the authority empowered to dismiss or remove a person or to reduce him in rank has to record reasons in writing as to why it is not reasonably practicable to hold such inquiry”.

“Such satisfaction has to be a subjective satisfaction of the authority so empowered. Mere observation that the departmental enquiry at this stage does not appear to be justified is not sufficient to invoke powers under Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India to dismiss an employee,” Justice Anil Kshetarpal of the high court held. He passed the order while allowing a petition filed by Sarabjit Singh, a dismissed Punjab police constable.

The petitioner had joined Punjab police in March 2011. Two FIRs have been registered against the petitioner. The first FIR was registered in February 2020 on charges of rape and criminal intimidation over allegations that in 2010, before the petitioner joined police service, he had an affair with the complainant and the couple had a physical relationship. It was alleged that after getting the job, the petitioner stopped talking to the complainant. Therefore, she had reported the matter after remaining silent for over a period of nine years. The second FIR was registered against him in March 2020 for evading arrest and related charges when the cops tried to arrest him in relation to the first FIR.

After this, the petitioner was dismissed by the state government under clause (b) of the 2nd proviso to Article 311(2) of the Constitution from the service while dispensing with the requirement of holding departmental enquiry. Challenging the dismissal orders, the petitioner argued that the state police authorities did not record the reasons for dispensing with the requirement of holding inquiry and, therefore, the order is not sustainable.

COURT OBSERVES

What has been recorded is ‘it does not seem justified to conduct departmental inquiry at this stage.’ .... On careful reading of clause (b) of 2nd proviso, it is apparent that the authority empowered to dismiss or remove a person or to reduce him in rank, has to record reasons in writing as to why it is not reasonably practicable to hold such inquiry