Court No. - 6
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7919 of 2020 Petitioner :- Raj Kumar Parihar Respondent :- Union Of India And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Avneesh Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
Heard Shri G.K. Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Avneesh Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Rohan Gupta, appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 2 to 6 and Shri Brijesh Kumar Srivastava, counsel for respondent no. 1.
The present petition has been filed alleging that the petitioner and the respondents entered into an agreement dated 28th April, 2015, whereby the parties agreed that the petitioner shall be appointed on the post of Assistant Coach for a period of five years with effect from the date of the joining on the post i.e. 28.4.2015. In the said agreement, the termination clause provided as under:-
"4. That the services of the party of the first part may be terminated as follows:
(i) By one calendar month's notice in writing given at any time during service under this agreement either by him to the Institute or by the Institute or their authorized officer to him without any cause assigned or if the party of the first part shall be guilty of any insubordination, intemperance or other misconduct or of any breach of non performance of any of the provisions of these presents or of any rules and orders of the Institute.
(ii) By the Institute without previous notice if the Institute is satisfied on medical evidence that the party of the first part is unfit and is likely for a considerable period to continue unfit by reason of ill health for the discharge of his duties.
PROVIDED always that the decision of the Institute that the party of the first part is unfit is likely to continue unfit shall be conclusively binding on party of the first part.
(iii) The Institute may in lieu of any notice, give the party of the first part, a sum equivalent to the amount of his pay for one month, or for notice shorter than one month, give a sum equal to the amount of his pay for the period by which such a notice falls short of one month. The term 'PAY' for the purpose of this clause shall mean the pay (including special pay and personal pay, if any) the party of the first part is receiving under this agreement at the time."
Prior to the agreement coming to an end, certain allegations were levelled against the petitioner herein, for which he was given a memorandum dated 18th September, 2019 raising certain allegations against him, to which the petitioner replied.
The allegations is that without taking any further action in terms of the said show cause notice and without any proper enquiry, an order dated 24th April, 2020, impugned herein, was passed recording that during the course of contractual appointment, it was observed that the workmanship and expertise of the petitioner was not up to the mark besides there were certain allegations of misconduct against him and after examining the entire matter, it was recorded that the workmanship and expertise of the petitioner was not up to the mark and his absorption as regular employee is considered undesirable. In view of the Covid-19 pandemic situation, it is decided to extend his contractual term up to 30.6.2020 on humanitarian ground and it was also provided that the employment shall come to an end on 30.6.2020.
Shri Rohan Gupta on the other hand points out that the actual order is office order dated 24th April, 2020, which has been filed alongwith counter affidavit. The said order dated 24th April, 2020 was modified by issuance of corrigendum to the following effect:-
"CORRIGENDUM Subject: Expiry of contractual services of Assistant Coaches:- Shri Ashutosh Kumar Singh, PF No. 5668 and Shri Raj Kumar Parihar, PF No. 5669-reg.
Ref.: (i) OO No. Estt./5668/2020/IITK/368 dated 24.04.2020 and (ii) OO No. Estt./5668/2020/IITK/369 dated 24.04.2020 The word "Termination of contractual services" as mentioned in subject matter of the above referred Office Orders shall be read as "Expiry of contractual services". The other matter remain unchanged.
All concerned are requested to take a note of the above. This issues with the approval of the Competent Authority.
S/d (Dr. J P Deshmukh) Deputy Registrar (Admin.)"
In view of the said, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is not worthy of acceptance.
I have perused the order and the nature of appointment of the petitioner, which is purely contractual in nature, the manner of termination has already been provided in the contract itself. The impugned order, although prima facie does not record any stigma, however, to avoid the future prospects that may be available to the petitioner, the averments made in the order dated 24th April, 2020 to the following effect is set aside:-
"During the course of his contractual appointment it was observed that the workmanship and expertise of Shri Raj Kumar Parihar as Lawn Tennis Coach was not up to the mark, besides there were certain allegations of misconduct against him."
In view of setting aside of said part of the order dated 24th April, 2020, nothing survives in the writ petition.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 19.8.2021 S. Rahman