DHARAM PAL Vs. FARIDABAD COMPLEX ADMINISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition by the plaintiff petitioners is directed against the order dated 17-2-1987 passed by the learned Sub Judge. Second Class, Faridabad, whereby their application for amendment of the plaint has been dismissed.

(2.) THE petitioners had filed the suit calling in question the order of termination of their services During the course of evidence, Siraj-ud-din Assistant from the office of the Faridabad Complex Administration appeared as D W. I. During the course of his cross-examination, he deposed that the services of the petitioners were terminated because of their absence from duty. He admitted that no reasonable opportunity had been afforded to them before the impugned orders of termination of their services were passed. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that they had all along been under the impression that their services had been terminated simply on the ground that they were temporary hands. The fact that they were eased out of service on the alleged misconduct of absence from duty came to their notice for the first times when Siraj ud din D. W. 1 appeared in the witness-box. They, therefore, made the application for amendment of their plant.

(3.) IN view of the judgment of the final Court in Jarnail Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors. , AIR 1986 SC 1626, it is by now well settled that even a temporary or ad-hoc employee cannot be visited with penal consequences on the ground of misconduct without affording him opportunity of hearing and holding an inquiry into the misconduct consistent with the rules of natural justice. The cause of action remains to be the wrongful termination of the services of the petitioners. No injury was going to be caused to the defendant-respondent in case they were allowed to add an additional ground to attack the impugned orders.