J.C. CHAKRAVARTI Vs. UNION OF INDIA (UOI)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Manager, Calcutta in the Sterling General Insurance Co. Ltd. (hereinafter also referred to as the Sterling) by a letter dated March 17, 1971 with effect from April 1, 1971, by way of ' contractual appointment', for a period of 3 years ending on the 31st March, 1974. The letter of appointment provided that on the expiry of the contract period, i.e.,. March 31, 1974 the petitioner's service would stand automatically terminated unless renewed by mutual agreement on terms as would be agreed upon. It was further provided that either party would be entitled to terminate the employment by a month's notice in writing or on payment of month's salary in lieu thereof. The employer reserved his right to terminate the service without notice at any time on ground of misconduct, gross negligence, absence from duty without permission, breach of discipline, etc.

(2.) WHILE the petitioner was working in the company on the basis of the said contract of service he was served with the following notice dated February 27, 1973 : As you are aware you have crossed the age of 60 years. This is to inform you that your appointment in contractual basis shall stand terminated on 31st March, 1973. This letter may, therefore, be treated as a notice of termination of your contractual appointment. You will be relieved on 31st March, 1973 and your dues will be settled as on that date.... This letter was received by the petitioner on March 5, 1973. The petitioner challenged the legal validity of the said letter and was informed by the company that the decision for termination of the contract of appointment had been taken in accordance with the general directive received from the General Insurance Corporation of India the respondent No. 5 herein.

(3.) THE petitioner thereafter made an application for addition of the Oriental as a party to the proceeding as respondent No. 6 which was duly allowed. The petitioner also filed an affidavit -in -reply reiterating the contentions made by him in his petition of motion.