VRAJENDRA NATH GUPTA Vs. GANGA RAM TRUST SOCIETY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT had sought the declaration from trial court that his termination from service was illegal. While relying upon respondent's rules and regulations governing its employees, trial court found it to be so. Whereas First Appellate Court vide impugned order of 23rd April, 2012 has held that termination of appellant's service is in consonance with the contract of his employment.

(2.) THE bare facts which emerge from the impugned judgment are that Appellant was appointed by respondents as Senior Pharmacy Store Officer with Sir Ganga Ram Hospital w.e.f. 7th January, 1993 and was kept on probation for one year. Upon successful completion of period of probation, appellant's service was regularized and he was made permanent w.e.f. 14th January, 1994. Revised pay -scales and higher pay - scales were given to appellant with retrospective effect i.e. from 1st August, 1997. It is the case of appellant that on 8th September, 2005 his services were terminated by the respondents without disclosing any specific reason. Appellant had filed the civil suit seeking declaration that termination order of 8th September, 2005 was illegal and a mandatory injunction was sought against the respondents to reinstate the appellant in service and to pay the arrears. After trial, appellant's suit was decreed by trial court on 23rd February, 2012. Respondents herein had preferred first appeal against aforesaid trial court's judgment and vide impugned order of 23rd April, 2012 appellant's suit has been dismissed.

(3.) AT the hearing it was vehemently submitted by learned counsel for appellant that on 24th August, 2005, Mr. Sanjeev Gulati subordinate official of appellant had produced the list of witnesses before the Inquiry Officer, in which, name of appellant was also included as defence witness. According to appellant, he was pressurized by respondents to become hostile in favour of respondents herein or to withdraw his name from list of defence witnesses and since appellant had refused to do so, therefore, it invoked the wrath of respondents leading to arbitrary termination of service of appellant. The main contention of appellant's counsel is that permanent and regular service of appellant has been illegally terminated by respondents without disclosing any reasons and in violation of rules and regulations governing employees of Sir Ganga Ram Hospital. During the course of hearing, attention of this Court was drawn to Rule 18 of the Rules and Regulations Governing Employees of The Sir Ganga Ram Hospital (hereinafter referred to as Employment Rules), which reads as under: 18. Termination of Employment