Punjab-Haryana High Court
Arvind Kumar Sharma vs State Of Haryana & Ors on 17 August, 2015
Author: Deepak Sibal
Bench: Deepak Sibal
C. W. P. No. 20656 of 2013 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Case No. : C. W. P. No. 20656 of 2013
Reserved On : August 12, 2015
Pronounced On : 17.08.2015
Arvind Kumar Sharma .... Petitioner
vs.
State of Haryana and others .... Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL.
* * *
To be referred to Reporters or not ?
Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ?
* * *
Present : Mr. Vikas Chatrath, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Harish Rathee, Senior DAG, Haryana.
* * *
DEEPAK SIBAL, J. :
Through the present petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of order terminating his services, with all consequential benefits.
The petitioner was appointed as Information Assistant under the National Rural Health Mission (hereinafter referred to as - the NRHM). The appointment was on contract basis. On expiry of the period of contract, from time to time, the petitioner was re-appointed, again on contract basis. MONIKA 2015.08.18 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document C. W. P. No. 20656 of 2013 2 Through the order impugned by the petitioner, his services were terminated.
I have heard counsel for the parties and with their able assistance, have also gone through the record of the case.
Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the order of termination is stigmatic and since the same has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice, the same is liable to be set aside. Counsel further argues that the Appointing Authority of the petitioner was Civil Surgeon, Ambala, who has not passed the order impugned by him and resultantly, the impugned order is liable to be set aside on that score alone. He further submits that the order terminating the services of the petitioner has been passed on the basis of pressure exerted by the Director General of Health Services, Haryana, who is not the Appointing or Punishing Authority of the petitioner. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the following judgments :-
1. Anant R. Kulkarni v. Y. P. Education Society and others reported as 2013 (6) SCC 515,
2. Union Territory of Chandigarh and others v. Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench and others reported as 2011 (2) RSJ 219,
3. Pawan Kumar v. State of Haryana and others - C. W. P. No. 6141 of 2005 decided on 25.04.2005.
Per contra, learned State counsel appearing on behalf of the MONIKA 2015.08.18 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document C. W. P. No. 20656 of 2013 3 respondents has defended the termination order. It has been stated that the petitioner was working on contract basis and since his work and conduct was not found to be good, after holding fact finding inquiries, in which he was associated, his services have been terminated. It is submitted that the petitioner had been appointed under the NRHM and his services have been terminated under orders of the Project Director of the NRHM, who was competent to do so.
From the perusal of the record and the arguments raised at the bar, it is apparent that while the petitioner was working on contract basis, several complaints qua his work and conduct were received. To verify the veracity of such complaints, two fact finding inquiries were conducted. In one of the inquiries conducted by Dr. Jasjeet Kaur, Deputy Director (Blood Safety), Haryana State AIDS Control Society, Panchkula, it was revealed that the petitioner not only misbehaved, but also used abusive words in vernacular language and threatened his colleagues. It was also found that he had been adopting lackadaisical attitude in performing his day to day duties in the office. He was also found to be in a habit of exerting political clout of his brother, who was the Personal Assistant of State President of a major political party. The relevant portion of the Inquiry Report is reproduced below :-
"On careful consideration and going through the complete record and MONIKA report of the inquiry committee in reference 2015.08.18 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document C. W. P. No. 20656 of 2013 4 to the complaint made by the assistant Satbir Kaur of GH, Ambala City, I, Dr. (Major) G. Kumar have come to the conclusion that the allegations against Mr. Arvind Sharma (a contractual employee), Information Assistant, GH Ambala have been substantiated.
He not only misbehaved, used abusive words in vernacular language and threatened his colleague Ms. Satbir Kaur but also has been adopting the lackadaisical attitude in performing his day to day work in the office. He also keeps on threatening his colleagues about their transfer through his political connection. His behaviour towards the general public coming to the hospital is also not commendable earlier also he has been warned by the PMO, GH, Ambala City to improve his behaviour but it didn't cut any ice. I feel and recommend that the end of justice will only be met if strict disciplinary action is taken against Mr. MONIKA Arvind Sharma with immediate effect and 2015.08.18 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document C. W. P. No. 20656 of 2013 5 this exemplary punishment will act as a deterrent for others also. [Emphasis supplied]"
In another fact finding inquiry, conducted by a Committee of two Senior Medical Officers, the petitioner was also found guilty. In this inquiry, several co-employees of the petitioner namely Satbir Kaur, Om Parkash Bhamani, Kiran Bala, Kumari Neetu Gupta, Dwaraka Parshad, Yatinder Kumar, Rajkumar, Om Parkash and Sujata vouched for the petitioner's bad behaviour with his colleagues. They further apprised the Inquiry Committee that the petitioner was in the habit of threatening his colleagues of getting them transferred and that he openly proclaimed that he had got several doctors and employees transferred at the behest of his brother Anil Sharma, who was Personal Assistant to the State President of a major National Political Party. Even a retired employee Smt. Trilochan Guglani appeared before the Inquiry Committee and stated that the petitioner's attitude was lackadaisical. She also corroborated with regard to the petitioner giving threats to his colleagues. Santosh Kumari, who had been transferred from the office, where the petitioner worked, also appeared before the Inquiry Committee and stated that when she asked the petitioner to do his work properly, he had threatened her, after which she was transferred.
The petitioner produced his defence witnesses, who stated that MONIKA the petitioner was well-behaved in the office. 2015.08.18 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document C. W. P. No. 20656 of 2013 6
After considering the facts, which were placed before the Inquiry Committee, a finding of guilt was returned against the petitioner as under :-
"In view of the complaints and explanations obtained from office record and statements of witnesses, the enquiry committee has reached on the conclusion that all allegations levelled by the complainant are proved. Sh. Arvind Sharma did not take interest in the office work, he misbehaves with the colleagues and uses unparliamentary language and also gives threats to employees to get them transferred. Therefore Sh. Arvind Sharma is guilty for his wrong doings and misconduct. Disciplinary action may be taken against him as per rules.
Enclosed : 1. Statement of all witnesses and documents from Page No. 6 to 39.
2. Documents submitted by Arvind Kumar Sharma regarding his conduct (Annex-K).
MONIKA Sd/- Sd/- 2015.08.18 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document C. W. P. No. 20656 of 2013 7 (Dr.Manisha Aggarwal) (Dr. K. S. Rana) Senior Medical Officer Senior Medical Officer General Hospital, Ambala City."
From the above, it is clear that in both the above referred fact finding inquiries, in which the petitioner was duly associated, rather in one of which he was also allowed to and he did produce his defence, findings of guilt have been returned against him to the effect that he was in a habit of using unparliamentary language with his colleagues and was generally abusive in nature. It was further found that he shirked work and used to threaten his co-employees by exerting political clout of his brother.
In addition to the above, on complaints of Smt. Kiran Bala and Smt. Santosh Kumari, who were working as Clerks in the same office as the petitioner, the Civil Surgeon, Ambala, through letter dated 16.10.2009, had warned the petitioner to improve his behaviour and behave decently with all his co-employees but to no avail.
The record further reveals the following complaints qua the petitioner :-
Date Contents By whom
29.03.2007 Absent from Mrs. Trilochan
duty Guglani
17.04.2007 Did not arrive Mrs. Trilochan
on duty in time Guglani
15.09.2009 Did not do Mrs. Satbir Kaur,
Hindi type Kiran Bala and
MONIKA work properly Santosh Kumari
2015.08.18 12:21
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
C. W. P. No. 20656 of 2013 8
16.10.2009 To run the work Civil Surgeon
of the office
smoothly
22.01.2010 With regard to Om Parkash
misbehaviour Bhamani, Store
of the petitioner Keeper
05.04.2010 The petitioner Kamla Bharti
was not found Member
present on his Panchayat
seat.
17.04.2010 Did not provide Dr. Pabnish
record which Aggarwal, M. O.
he was
supposed to
20.04.2010 Regarding Ashok Kumar
misconduct
on the part of
the petitioner
26.04.2010 Non-cooperative Dr. K. S. Rana
attitude of the Senior Medical
petitioner was Officers
highlighted
07.05.2010 Explanation P. M. O.
of the petitioner Ambala
was called for
10.05.2010 Refused to do P. M. O.
Govt. work Ambala
10.05.2010 Regarding Class-IV
misconduct of employees
the petitioner of the hospital
13.05.2010 Threat to Sujata, Data
Sujata to get Entry Operator
her transferred
MONIKA From the above facts, the irresistible conclusion, which can be
2015.08.18 12:21
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
C. W. P. No. 20656 of 2013 9
drawn is that the petitioner, who was a contractual employee, was not discharging his duties, as were expected from him. He has thus rightly been shown the door as per the terms of his appointment. The fact finding inquiries, in which he was associated and in one of which, he even produced defence witnesses, according to me, are sufficient compliance with the principles of natural justice to do away with the services of a contractual employee.
The order dated 06.09.2013, through which the petitioner's services were terminated, is reproduced below :-
"Sub. Enquiry Report - For Consideration of a few facts against Mr. Arvind Sharma (Previous was posted at GH, Ambala City) Information Assistant.
In reference to letter no. NRHM-
2013/2293 and NRHM-2013/2301 dated
06.09.2013 of Member Secretary-cum-Civil
Surgeon, District Health and Family Welfare Society, Ambala on subject cited above.
In compliance to the letter no. 4356 dated 22.08.2013 of Deputy Commissioner, Ambala your services are henceforth terminated from 07.09.2013 after giving you 24 hrs notice MONIKA today i.e. 06.09.2013.2015.08.18 12:21
I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document C. W. P. No. 20656 of 2013 10
Sd/-
Senior Medical Officer, General Hospital, Ambala Cantt."
The above order of termination of services of the petitioner can, by no length of imagination, be termed as stigmatic.
The order, on which the impugned termination order is based, has been addressed by the Civil Surgeon, Ambala to the Senior Medical Officer, General Hospital, Ambala Cantt. That is an internal communication and is not even addressed to the petitioner. Even otherwise, a perusal of the same shows that it refers to only the fact finding inquiries, which had been conducted to inquire into the complaints received against the petitioner. It may be noted that the petitioner was associated in these inquiries. He had voluntarily taken part in the same and had never challenged the institution thereof. Even today, the same have not been challenged.
The argument raised by counsel for the petitioner, to the effect that it was the Civil Surgeon, Ambala, who was the Appointing Authority of the petitioner and only he could have terminated the services of the petitioner, is an argument, which is to be considered only to be rejected.
It is undisputed that the petitioner was appointed under the NRHM. The Project Director, NRHM, after going through a Memo by the Director General, Health Services, Haryana, which was based on the fact finding inquiries conducted against the petitioner, through his letter dated 17.12.2012 (Annexure R-3), had, apparently after going through the same, MONIKA 2015.08.18 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document C. W. P. No. 20656 of 2013 11 asked the Civil Surgeon, Ambala to take necessary action. Accordingly, action was taken and the services of the petitioner were terminated. Thus, the services of the petitioner were terminated under orders of the competent Authority. Even otherwise, through letter dated 06.09.2013 (Annexure P-
21), it is the Civil Surgeon, Ambala, who, while referring to the above referred Memo, asked the Senior Medical Officer, General Hospital, Ambala Cantt. to terminate the services of the petitioner.
Thus, viewed from any angle, the services of the petitioner were rightly terminated.
The judgments cited by learned counsel for the petitioner are distinguishable. In the case of Union Territory of Chandigarh (supra), the order of termination was per se stigmatic containing a punishment of debarring the employee therein from future employment, which is not the case herein.
In Pawan Kumar's (supra), the impugned orders therein were set aside as the same were found to be in violation of principles of natural justice. In the case in hand, there is no violation of principles of natural justice.
So far as case of Anant R. Kulkarni (supra) is concerned, that case pertained to an inquiry against a retired employee, who was working on regular basis. In that case, the employee therein was issued a vague charge-sheet, which was one of the main grounds to challenge the MONIKA same. The facts of the case in hand are completely different. 2015.08.18 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document C. W. P. No. 20656 of 2013 12
In view of the above, finding no merit in the present writ petition, the same is hereby dismissed.
No costs.
( DEEPAK SIBAL ) JUDGE Pronounced On : 17.08.2015 monika MONIKA 2015.08.18 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document