Jaipur: The Rajasthan High Court has dismissed a batch of appeals filed by the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (RSRTC), upholding the reinstatement of contractual Driver-cum-Conductors whose services were terminated on allegations of misconduct without giving them an opportunity of hearing.
A Division Bench of Justice Arun Monga and Justice Ashutosh Kumar held that although a contractual or temporary employee does not enjoy the same service protection as a regular government employee, a termination based on misconduct cannot be made without following the principles of natural justice.
Contractual Status Does Not Override Natural Justice
The Court drew a distinction between a simple termination under the terms of a contract and a termination founded on allegations of misconduct.
Court held that where a contractual employee is simply discontinued in accordance with the contract or on expiry of the engagement, no disciplinary enquiry is ordinarily required.
However, once misconduct becomes the basis of termination, the action becomes punitive and the employee must be informed of the allegations and given an opportunity to be heard.
The case arose after RSRTC terminated the services of Manoj Kumar and other contractual Driver-cum-Conductors on February 21, 2008, citing alleged violations of their contractual conditions.
Manoj Kumar challenged the termination before the Rajasthan High Court, contending that he had been removed without being given an opportunity to explain the allegations against him.
The Single Judge subsequently quashed the termination orders and directed reinstatement with continuity of service, while denying back wages and allowing RSRTC to take a fresh decision after conducting a disciplinary enquiry.
RSRTC then challenged the Single Judge’s order before the Division Bench.
HC Relies on Earlier Ramraj Gurjar Judgment
The High Court further observed that the case was squarely covered by its earlier Division Bench judgment in Ramraj Gurjar v. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation.
Since the same class of employees, nature of engagement and manner of discontinuance were involved, the Court found no basis to interfere with the Single Judge’s order applying the earlier precedent.
The Bench noted that the relief granted by the Single Judge was limited. The employees were granted reinstatement with continuity of service, but back wages were denied.
RSRTC Appeals Dismissed
The Division Bench ultimately dismissed the special appeals and directed compliance with the Single Judge’s order.