Published on: 10 September 2023 at 10:30 IST
Court: Supreme Court of India
Citation: State of Punjab V. Balbir Singh (2004)
Honourable Supreme Court of India has held that a Government employee cannot be Discharged Simpliciter. It is held that it is important to understand the prima facie incident which led to the discharge order was with motive or inducing factor or was having the foundation of order of discharge.
It is held that in such cases it is necessary to ascertain the “Nature of Enquiry” i.e. whether the termination is preceded by a full-scale formal enquiry into allegations involving misconduct on the part of the respondent, which culminated in the finding of guilt, and, secondly, the “Purpose of the Enquiry” i.e. whether the purpose of the enquiry is to find out any misconduct on the part of the employee or it is aimed at finding out as to the respondent being unlikely to prove as an Efficient Government Officer.
7. Thus the principle that in order to determine whether the misconduct is motive or foundation of order of termination, the test to be applied is to ask the question as to what was the “object of the enquiry”.
If an enquiry or an assessment is done with the object of finding out any misconduct on the part of the employee and for that reason his services are terminated, then it would be punitive in nature. On the other hand, if such an enquiry or an assessment is aimed at determining the suitability of an employee for a particular job, such termination would be termination simpliciter and not punitive in nature.
This principle was laid down by Shah, J. (as he then was) as early as 1961 in the case of State of Orissa v. Ram Narayan Das, (1961) 1 SCR 606 : AIR 1961 SC 177 : (1961) 1 LLJ 552. It was held that one should look into “object or purpose of the enquiry” and not merely hold the termination to be punitive merely because of an antecedent enquiry.
Whether it (order of termination) amounts to an order of dismissal depends upon the nature of the enquiry, if any, the proceedings taken therein and the substance of the final order passed on such enquiry. On the facts of that case, the termination of a probationer was upheld inasmuch as the purpose of the enquiry was held to be to find out if the employee could be confirmed. The purpose of the enquiry was not to find out if he was guilty of any misconduct, negligence, inefficiency or other disqualification.
Drafted By Abhijit Mishra