INDIAN AIRLINES CORPORATION Vs. SUKHDEO RAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Prior to August 1953, the respondent was employed as a motor driver in Airways (India) Ltd. On the passing of the Air Corporation Act XXVII of 1953, and consequent thereupon of the taking over of the existing air companies including the Airways (India) Ltd., by the appellant-Corporation, he became the employee of the appellant-Corporation. On January 13, 1956, he was suspended on certain charges. On being found guilty of those charges after an enquiry had been held, he was dismissed by an order dated February 6, 1956.

(2.) The respondent filed a suit alleging that the enquiry had been conducted in breach of the procedure laid down by the Regulations made by the Corporation under Section 45 of the Act and that therefore, the dismissal was illegal and void. The Trial Court accepted the contention and granted a declaration that his service continued as the order dismissing him was null and void. That decree was upheld by the first appellate court. In a second appeal in the High Court, it was conceded that the Regulations apprised to the respondent's case, and that the procedure therein laid down for terminating his service was not complied with. The Corporation's contention however, was that the only relief to which the respondent was entitled to was damages and that a declaration such as the one granted by the Trial Court, could not be given. The High Court rejected that contention holding that the Corporation was under a statutory obligation to observe the procedure laid down in the Regulations and that that not having been done, the order of dismissal was illegal and void, and the respondent continued to be in the employment of the Corporation as if there was no termination of service. This appeal, founded on a certificate granted by the High Court is directed against its aforesaid judgment and decree.

(3.) It being an admitted fact that the respondent's service was terminated in breach of the procedural safeguards provided in the Regulations the question for determination whether in cases such as the one before us, a declaration; given by the Trial Court and upheld by the High Court could be granted.