{"id":309594,"date":"2023-12-18T16:00:54","date_gmt":"2023-12-18T10:30:54","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=309594"},"modified":"2023-12-21T18:02:20","modified_gmt":"2023-12-21T12:32:20","slug":"termination-without-opportunity-of-being-heard-violates-article-3112-mandate-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/18\/termination-without-opportunity-of-being-heard-violates-article-3112-mandate-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog\/","title":{"rendered":"Termination without opportunity of being heard violates Article 311(2) mandate: Calcutta High Court"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Calcutta High Court:<\/span> In a petition challenging the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Kolkata Bench, dated 13-09-2022, which set aside the termination of the respondent 1’s service as a probationary Civil Motor Driver at the Army Recruiting Office, Gopalpur, a division bench comprising of Gaurang Kanth*<\/span> and Tapabrata Chakraborty, JJ., dismissed the writ petition, affirming the Central Administrative Tribunal’s decision. The Court held that “the termination letter dated 13th July, 2018 was issued without affording an opportunity of hearing to the respondent no. 1 and hence it is in violation of Article 311 (2) of the Constitution of India.”<\/span><\/p>\n

Brief Facts<\/p>\n

In the instant matter, respondent 1 was appointed on 27-11-2017, as a Civil Motor Driver on probation for two years. Respondent 1 was terminated from service based on alleged misconduct during a recruiting rally on 12-02-2018, where he was accused of providing his mobile number to candidates with ulterior motives. A Board of Officers conducted an inquiry, recommending disciplinary action against respondent 1. Integrated Headquarters of Ministry of Defence directed termination as per Para 3 of the appointment letter. The termination occurred on 13-07-2018, without affording an opportunity of hearing to respondent 1.<\/p>\n

Respondent 1 challenged the said termination before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Kolkata Bench, and vide order dated 13-09-2022, the same was set aside. In the present petition, the petitioners challenged the impugned order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal.<\/p>\n

Moot Point<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. \n

    Whether the termination was a simple termination as per the appointment letter or a punitive measure for alleged misconduct?<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  2. \n

    Whether the termination violated Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India by not affording an opportunity of hearing?<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Parties’ Contentions<\/p>\n

    The petitioners contended that the termination was within the powers of Para 2 & 3 of the appointment letter for a probationer. It was contended that the inquiry was a fact-finding exercise due to respondent 1’s probationary status, not requiring a full disciplinary process under Central Civil Services (Temporary Services) Rules, 1965. It was further contended that the respondent 1’s termination was simpliciter, with no stigma attached.<\/p>\n

    Respondent 1 contended that the termination violated due process, as respondent 1 was not given an opportunity of hearing. It was contended that the termination was punitive, impacting the character and integrity of respondent no. 1, justifying court intervention.<\/p>\n

    Court’s Analysis<\/p>\n

    The Court referred to legal precedents, including State of Punjab v. Sukhraj Bahadur, 1968 SCC OnLine SC 26 and Samsher Singh v. State of Punjab, (1974) 2 SCC 831, to establish principles governing the termination of probationers. The Court rejected the petitioners’ argument that the inquiry was only fact-finding, stating that it aimed to determine alleged misconduct.<\/p>\n

    “Even though, the termination order dated 13th July, 2018 was made under the camouflage or cloak of an order of termination simpliciter as per the terms of the appointment letter, it was actually a punishment on the ground of alleged misconduct.”<\/p>\n

    The Court concluded that the termination was based on an inquiry into alleged misconduct, not performance, making it punitive. The Court opined that the termination, though appearing simpliciter, lacked due process by not providing respondent no. 1 with an opportunity of hearing, violating Article 311(2) of the Constitution. The Court held that the Tribunal rightly quashed the termination with all the consequential benefits.<\/p>\n

    Court’s Decision<\/p>\n

    The writ petition is dismissed, and the termination order is set aside. The petitioners may initiate disciplinary proceedings in accordance with the law. No costs are awarded. A subsequent prayer for a stay is rejected.<\/p>\n

    [Union of India<\/span> v. Soumitra Dey<\/span>, 2023 SCC OnLine Cal 5095<\/a>, order dated 15-12-2023<\/span>]<\/p>\n

    *Judgment by Justice Gaurang Kanth<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n

    Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

    Mr. Billwadal Bhattacharyya, Mr. Pramod Kumar Drolia, Mr. Santosh Kumar Pandey, Counsel for the Petitioners<\/p>\n

    Mr. P. C. Das, Counsel for the Respondent 1<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    The Calcutta High Court determined that the termination, despite being framed as simpliciter, was based on respondent’s alleged misconduct.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67514,"featured_media":290502,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[63652,2689,50564,60881,63651,20941,32834],"class_list":["post-309594","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-article-3112","tag-Calcutta_High_Court","tag-due-process","tag-justice-gaurang-kanth","tag-justice-tapabrata-chakraborty","tag-opportunity-of-being-heard","tag-termination-of-service"],"yoast_head":"\nTermination without opportunity of being heard violates Article 311(2) mandate: Calcutta High Court | SCC Blog<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Calcutta High Court held that termination without opportunity of being heard is void of Due Process violating Article 311(2).\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/18\/termination-without-opportunity-of-being-heard-violates-article-3112-mandate-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Termination without opportunity of being heard violates Article 311(2) mandate: Calcutta High Court\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Calcutta High Court held that termination without opportunity of being heard is void of Due Process violating Article 311(2).\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/18\/termination-without-opportunity-of-being-heard-violates-article-3112-mandate-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2023-12-18T10:30:54+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2023-12-21T12:32:20+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Ritu\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Termination without opportunity of being heard violates Article 311(2) mandate: Calcutta High Court\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Ritu\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/18\/termination-without-opportunity-of-being-heard-violates-article-3112-mandate-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/18\/termination-without-opportunity-of-being-heard-violates-article-3112-mandate-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog\/\",\"name\":\"Termination without opportunity of being heard violates Article 311(2) mandate: Calcutta High Court | SCC Blog\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/18\/termination-without-opportunity-of-being-heard-violates-article-3112-mandate-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/18\/termination-without-opportunity-of-being-heard-violates-article-3112-mandate-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2023-12-18T10:30:54+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2023-12-21T12:32:20+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9\"},\"description\":\"Calcutta High Court held that termination without opportunity of being heard is void of Due Process violating Article 311(2).\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/18\/termination-without-opportunity-of-being-heard-violates-article-3112-mandate-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/18\/termination-without-opportunity-of-being-heard-violates-article-3112-mandate-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/18\/termination-without-opportunity-of-being-heard-violates-article-3112-mandate-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"calcutta high court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/18\/termination-without-opportunity-of-being-heard-violates-article-3112-mandate-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Termination without opportunity of being heard violates Article 311(2) mandate: Calcutta High Court\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9\",\"name\":\"Ritu\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Ritu\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_7\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Termination without opportunity of being heard violates Article 311(2) mandate: Calcutta High Court | SCC Blog","description":"Calcutta High Court held that termination without opportunity of being heard is void of Due Process violating Article 311(2).","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/18\/termination-without-opportunity-of-being-heard-violates-article-3112-mandate-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Termination without opportunity of being heard violates Article 311(2) mandate: Calcutta High Court","og_description":"Calcutta High Court held that termination without opportunity of being heard is void of Due Process violating Article 311(2).","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/18\/termination-without-opportunity-of-being-heard-violates-article-3112-mandate-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2023-12-18T10:30:54+00:00","article_modified_time":"2023-12-21T12:32:20+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Ritu","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Termination without opportunity of being heard violates Article 311(2) mandate: Calcutta High Court","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Ritu","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/18\/termination-without-opportunity-of-being-heard-violates-article-3112-mandate-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/18\/termination-without-opportunity-of-being-heard-violates-article-3112-mandate-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog\/","name":"Termination without opportunity of being heard violates Article 311(2) mandate: Calcutta High Court | SCC Blog","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/18\/termination-without-opportunity-of-being-heard-violates-article-3112-mandate-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/18\/termination-without-opportunity-of-being-heard-violates-article-3112-mandate-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp","datePublished":"2023-12-18T10:30:54+00:00","dateModified":"2023-12-21T12:32:20+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9"},"description":"Calcutta High Court held that termination without opportunity of being heard is void of Due Process violating Article 311(2).","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/18\/termination-without-opportunity-of-being-heard-violates-article-3112-mandate-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/18\/termination-without-opportunity-of-being-heard-violates-article-3112-mandate-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/18\/termination-without-opportunity-of-being-heard-violates-article-3112-mandate-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"calcutta high court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/18\/termination-without-opportunity-of-being-heard-violates-article-3112-mandate-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Termination without opportunity of being heard violates Article 311(2) mandate: Calcutta High Court"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9","name":"Ritu","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Ritu"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_7\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":316536,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/08\/termination-of-services-of-probationer-is-neither-per-se-dismissal-nor-removal-calcutta-high-court-scc-times\/","url_meta":{"origin":309594,"position":0},"title":"\u2018Probationer\u2019s termination is neither per se dismissal nor removal\u2019; Calcutta High Court upholds termination order","author":"Ritu","date":"March 8, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Whether the termination, in present case, be termed an innocuous termination simpliciter or an order of punishment based on the alleged misconduct of the petitioner?","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Calcutta High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":310408,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/30\/cal-hc-upholds-rectification-of-initial-pay-fixation-error-under-the-assured-career-progression-scheme-scc-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":309594,"position":1},"title":"Calcutta High Court upholds rectification of initial pay fixation error under the Assured Career Progression Scheme","author":"Ritu","date":"December 30, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The ACP Scheme mandates upgradation to the next higher grade in the existing hierarchy and the petitioner, being a Constable, was entitled to the 1st ACP upgradation in the existing hierarchical pay scale.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"calcutta high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":296751,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/07\/13\/supreme-court-collegium-recommends-transfer-of-3-high-court-judges-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":309594,"position":2},"title":"Supreme Court Collegium recommends transfer of 3 High Court Judges","author":"Sucheta","date":"July 13, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Resolution dated 12-07-2023 is a reiteration of the Collegium\u2019s proposal dated 05-7-2023 wherein they had recommended transfer of Justice Manoj Bajaj, Justice D.K. Singh and Justice Gaurang Kanth.","rel":"","context":"In "Appointments & Transfers"","block_context":{"text":"Appointments & Transfers","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/news\/appointments\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"collegium transfer high court judges","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/collegium-transfer-high-court-judges.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/collegium-transfer-high-court-judges.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/collegium-transfer-high-court-judges.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/collegium-transfer-high-court-judges.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":315431,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/27\/calcutta-high-court-dismisses-writ-petition-on-termination-of-employment-by-private-school-scc-times\/","url_meta":{"origin":309594,"position":3},"title":"\u2018Can\u2019t approach Writ Court to enforce Contract of personal service\u2019; Calcutta High Court dismisses Writ Petition on Termination of Employment by Private School","author":"Ritu","date":"February 27, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Calcutta High Court held that a party can resort to the writ jurisdiction only if there involves public law element and not to enforce a contract of personal service, including all matters relating to the service of the employee-confirmation, suspension, transfer, termination, etc.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Calcutta High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":318433,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/26\/calcutta-high-court-affirms-single-benchs-e-interim-order-protecting-daily-wage-workers-from-termination-amid-tender-process-scc-times\/","url_meta":{"origin":309594,"position":4},"title":"Calcutta High Court affirms Single Bench\u2019s Interim Order protecting Daily Wage Workers from termination amid tender process","author":"Ritu","date":"March 26, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Calcutta High Court opined that the Single Bench had appropriately safeguarded the interests of both parties by restraining termination pending the final outcome of the writ petitions.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Calcutta High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":322824,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/05\/23\/bombay-hc-upholds-mat-judgment-reinstating-employee-terminated-for-misconduct-by-state\/","url_meta":{"origin":309594,"position":5},"title":"Bombay High Court reinstates government employee terminated by State issuing a stigmatic order without conducting enquiry","author":"Editor","date":"May 23, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The Court referred to MAT\u2019s finding that the petitioners were empowered to terminate the services of a probationer in case of misconduct, provided that such misconduct is proved after an opportunity of being heard is availed to the respondent. However, the same was not followed by the petitioners.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Bombay High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/309594","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67514"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=309594"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/309594\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/290502"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=309594"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=309594"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=309594"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}