E-Paper
Dismissed employee can’t be served chargesheet: Punjab & Haryana HC
The bench of justice HS Brar was dealing with a plea from one Suresh Jindal, who at the time of dismissal from service in 2013 was working as an grade-2 inspector.
The Punjab and Haryana high court has quashed three charge sheets issued to a former Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation employee by the corporation ruling that disciplinary proceedings can’t be issued against an employee after the relationship of an employer and employee has been irrevocably severed by an order of dismissal.
The bench of justice HS Brar was dealing with a plea from one Suresh Jindal, who at the time of dismissal from service in 2013 was working as an grade-2 inspector. He was convicted and sentenced in October 2013 under the Prevention of Corruption Act by a Moga court and based on that on October 31, 2013, was dismissed from the service. However, in 2017 the corporation issued three charge sheets to the petitioner and also initiated departmental inquiry proceedings. It was this decision he had challenged in high court in 2018.
The court said that the jurisdiction of the employer to initiate disciplinary proceedings are subject to the employee’s active status within the organisation.
“..the moment a legal separation from service occurs, whether through final dismissal, removal, resignation or any other form of termination, the individual ceases to be subject to the employer’s disciplinary control,” it said adding that any notion of extending this relationship post-severance cannot be sustained by “assumption, legal fiction, or mere “deeming provision” without clear and unambiguous legal backing. The rules must explicitly provide for such contingencies, such as inquiries continuing after retirement for the specific purpose of withholding or withdrawing pensionary benefits.
“Severance of the master-service relation between the employer and employee would incapacitate the employer to start disciplinary proceedings against a former employee in absence of explicit statutory laws enabling it,” it said referring to Punjab Civil Service (Punishment and Appeal ) Rules, 1970 which the court said makes it abundantly clear that the penalties prescribed can be imposed only on a “government employee” and the petitioner having been dismissed in 2013, ceased to be a government employee for the purpose of these rules long before issuance of charge sheets in 2017.
The court also did not accept the argument from the corporation’s counsel that Punjab Civil Service Rule permits the withholding or withdrawing of pension after retirement under certain conditions observing that firstly, the petitioner being an employee of the corporation was not entitled for pension and second a proviso which deals with the withholding of pensionary benefits cannot be invoked against a person who is not eligible for pension at the first place. The rule only permits action for the specific purpose of withholding of pension. It does not and cannot confer a blanket authority to issue a fresh charge sheet and conduct a full-fledged departmental inquiry against a person who has already been dismissed from service. “Any attempt to initiate fresh proceedings is void ab initio, ultra vires and without the sanction of law. The foundational employer-employee relationship having ceased to exist, the respondents lacked the jurisdictional authority to issue them,” it said quashing charge sheets and notice regarding departmental proceedings.
