Court Orders Reinstatement with Back-Wages for Employee Terminated Under Unconstitutional Regulation
In a landmark judgment, the Allahabad High Court has declared Regulation 10(2)(a) of the Gorakhpur Kshetriya Gramin Bank (Staff) Service Regulations, 1980, unconstitutional. The court found that the regulation granted arbitrary and unguided power to terminate an employee's service without just cause, violating Article 14 of the Indian Constitution which ensures the right to equality.
The case, titled "Sachindra Kumar Pandey v. Gorakhpur Kshetriya Gramin Bank," revolved around the termination of Mr. Pandey, a Clerk in the Gorakhpur Kshetriya Gramin Bank, during his probation period. The bank had terminated his services on the grounds that his performance was unsatisfactory, invoking the contentious regulation.
The bench, comprising Justices J.J. Munir and Indrajeet Shukla, ruled that the regulation provided for termination of service by notice without just cause, which is arbitrary and unconstitutional. The court emphasized that any statutory provision allowing for such arbitrary action is in direct conflict with the principles enshrined in the Constitution.
The judgment draws heavily on precedents set by the Supreme Court, particularly the case of "M.K. Agarwal v. Gurgaon Gramin Bank," where a similar regulation was struck down. The court reiterated that the absence of a clear statutory indication for continuation as a probationer beyond the maximum period of probation results in deemed confirmation of the employee.
Furthermore, the court noted that the declaration of unconstitutionality operates retrospectively, rendering any termination orders passed under the now-invalid regulation void from the outset. Consequently, Mr. Pandey was granted relief in the form of 50% back-wages and all consequential benefits, including superannuation benefits, recognizing his lack of gainful employment during the protracted legal battle.
This decision underscores the judiciary's role in safeguarding employees' rights against arbitrary administrative actions, reinforcing the constitutional mandate for equality and non-arbitrariness in employment practices.
Bottom Line :
Employment Law - Termination of service of an employee during probation without confirmation order - Deemed confirmation upon expiry of maximum probation period in absence of express order - Regulation providing for arbitrary and unguided power to terminate services held unconstitutional - Retrospective application of judgment declaring the regulation unconstitutional.
Statutory provision(s):
- Article 14 of the Constitution of India
- Regulation 9 and 10 of the Gorakhpur Kshetriya Gramin Bank (Staff) Service Regulations, 1980
- Regional Rural Banks Act, 1976
