Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

­

1. Brief facts as averred in the plaint are that plaintiff is a professionally qualified civil engineer having vast experience and has also worked with the Govt. of Haryana as a Consultant Engineer till his superannuation. Thereafter, the plaintiff has been offered jobs by the companies such as Louis Berger Group Inc (USA), Theme Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd. but he was not satisfied with the conditions and did not accept the said offers. The defendant offered the plaintiff to work as a Resident Engineer for the supervision of construction work at Adigrat­Adwa­Shire Road Upgrading Project Shire Adi Abun and the appointment letter dated 10.03.2008 was issued which contained the service conditions and assured that the period of employment was tentatively 30 months. The plaintiff accepted the same. The plaintiff left for Ethiopia in the month of March, 2008 and with utmost sincerity and diligence started work on the project assigned to him. The clients of the defendant were completely satisfied with the performance and working of the plaintiff and also praised professional caliber of plaintiff on several occasions. In the month of April, 2008 Sh. Pinaki Rai Chaudhary, MD of the defendant company along with other junior engineers visited Ethiopia and directed the plaintiff to prepare and serve food using his resources to all the engineers at his residence on the payment basis till they remained at work site. The plaintiff politely declined and volunteered to honour all the accompanying persons for some couple of days, but not for all the times as wife of the plaintiff was also scheduled to reach Ethiopia. It is averred that this solitary incident was taken by the MD of the defendant as an insult and he pressurized the plaintiff to resign from the services. The plaintiff resisted as he was not at fault. But to utter shock and dismay of the plaintiff, he received email dated 19.08.2008 wherein serious allegations on the performance of the plaintiff were levelled and without affording any opportunity of being heard, the defendant in an arbitrary, unjust and illegal manner by invoking clause 15 (i) & (ii) of the letter of assignment terminated the services of the plaintiff vide letter dated 27.08.2008.

2.Whether the plaintiff is entitled to decree of money as prayed for ? OPP

3.Relief

8. In order to prove his case, the plaintiff examined himself as PW­1 and filed his evidence by way of affidavit which is Ex. PW1/A wherein he reiterated the averments made in the plaint. During his deposition, he has also placed on record the copy of appointment letter issued by Inter Continental Consultants & Technocrafts Pvt. Ltd. dated 25.01.2006 as Ex. PW1/1, appointment letter issued by Louis Berger Group INC dated 03.08.2006 and letter of termination of contract dated 26.12.2007 as Ex. PW1/2 (Colly), appointment letter dated 16.02.2008 issued by Theme Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd. as Ex PW1/3, letters dated 11.02.2008 and 25.02.2008 issued by the defendant as Ex. PW1/4 (Colly), the appointment letter dated 10.03.2008 issued by the defendant as Ex. PW1/5, copy of email dated 19.08.2008, termination letter dated 27.08.2008 and another letter dated 27.08.2008 issued by the defendant as Ex. PW1/6 (Colly), copy of email dated 10.09.2008 and the medical certificate dated 02.09.2008 as Ex. PW1/7 (Colly), copy of handing/taking over charge dated 01.09.2008 as Ex. PW1/8, medical report dated 20.09.2008 as Ex. PW1/9, copy of railway ticket as Ex. PW1/10, legal notice dated 10.10.2008 and reply thereof dated 21.11.2008 as Ex. PW1/11 (Colly) .

42. Further, in addition to above, it is not believable that the plaintiff could not get any employment after being terminated by the defendant in view of facts averred in the plaint that plaintiff has served for 30 years the Govt. of Haryana and retired as consultant engineer and thereafter he had been getting the offer from one company after another. After his retirement, he worked with Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt. Ltd. and thereafter he was offered the job by Louis Berger Group which he declined. Thereafter he was being offered a job by Theme Engineering Services which he again declined and thereafter the defendant appointed him as Resident Engineer. It shows that plaintiff was getting jobs and in fact there was no difficulty in procuring the employment due to rich experience of the plaintiff in the civil engineering.