V RAGHURAM Vs. SINGARENI COLLIERIES COMPANY LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition is filed to quash the orders of termination issued by the respondent company on 4/10/1982.

(2.) The petitioner was selected and appointed by the respondent as Medical Officer on 18/09/1980. As per the said order of appointment, the petitioner will be on probation for a period of one year and during the period of probation his services will be terminable by one months notice on either side and on confirmation he will be required to enter into an agreement to serve the company for a period of five years from the date of confirmation, and the order further recites that the company reserves the right to terminate the contract by giving him three months notice or three months pay in lieu of notice without assigning any reason. On 30/10/1981 the Personnel Officer addressed a letter to the superintendent, Area Hospital, Bellampalli where the petitioner was working proposing the confirmation and also requiring the necessary agreement to be taken on a stamp paper. The petitioner averred in the affidavit that he purchased the necessary stamp papers and submitted to the authorities on 15/11/1981, and nothing required to be done on his part. Thereafter the impugned order was passed on 4/10/1982 which is in these terms : The Singareni Collieries Company Limited Dated 4th and 5/10/1982. Registered Office, Kothagudem Collieries - 507101. Bhadrachalam Road Station, S.C. Rly. Ref. No. C/2027, Dr. V. Raghu Ram, Medical Officer, Area Hospital, Bellampalli. Through E.D. BPA It is regretted that your service are no longer required by the company. Your services stand terminated on and from 8/10/1982. 2. You will be relived of your post on 8/10/1982 by paying you three months salary in lieu of notice, as required under para 4 of your appointment order No. C/1988 dated 18/09/1980.

(3.) Controller of Accounts (F & A), BPA is being advised to settle your accounts with the company. (Sd.) x x x for Chairman & Managing Director 3. The petitioner challenges the said order on the ground that his services were terminated by way of punishment and taking disciplinary action against him and the impugned order is violative of the principles of natural justice and also Rule 11 of the Conduct and Disciplinary Rules relating to the company which requires an opportunity to be given to the employee and consequently the impugned order is liable to be set aside.