Court holds dismissal without inquiry and opportunity of hearing violates Article 311(2) of Constitution; directs reinstatement of Village Development Officer whose disability certificate was challenged post-confirmation.
In a significant judgment dated August 21, 2026, the Rajasthan High Court, presided over by Mr. Justice Mukesh Rajpurohit, set aside the termination order of Babu Ram, a confirmed Village Development Officer appointed under the specially-abled category, holding that his dismissal was illegal due to violation of principles of natural justice and procedural safeguards under Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India.
Babu Ram, the petitioner, claimed locomotor disability exceeding 40%, supported by valid certificates issued by competent medical authorities in 2013 and 2018, which qualified him for reservation under the specially-abled category as per the Rajasthan Staff Selection Board's advertisement for Village Development Officer posts. He was selected, appointed on April 13, 2023, medically examined post-appointment with confirmation of 50% disability, completed probation, and was confirmed in service.
Controversy arose when, pursuant to a government directive in 2025, re-examination of specially-abled employees was conducted. The fresh medical assessment in April 2026 reported disability at 30.5%, below the 40% threshold required for reservation. Based on this, the District Establishment Committee recommended cancellation of Babu Ram's appointment, which was executed by the Block Development Officer on July 7, 2026.
Challenging this, Babu Ram argued that the termination was effected without supplying him the medical report that lowered his assessed disability, without any show-cause notice or opportunity to respond, thus violating natural justice. The Court agreed, emphasizing that the mere discrepancy in medical assessments does not prove fraud or invalidity of the earlier certificate. The respondents had failed to conduct any inquiry or establish any wrongdoing on the part of the petitioner.
The Court relied heavily on the Supreme Court's decision in Debashish Mohapatra & Ors. v. District and Session Judge, Jagatsinghpur & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 721, which underscores the constitutional protection afforded to confirmed civil servants under Article 311(2), mandating an inquiry before dismissal except in narrowly defined exceptions. The Court distinguished the present case from those involving fraudulent appointments, noting that no such allegation was made.
Further, the Court noted that the disability certificate is issued under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, which prescribes a statutory certification mechanism, and an administrative authority cannot disregard such certification without following due process as per the statutory framework.
The High Court directed the respondents to reinstate Babu Ram to his post immediately and allowed them liberty to undertake any proceedings in accordance with law, provided the petitioner is furnished with all relevant material and given a reasonable opportunity to be heard. The judgment clarifies that no final opinion is expressed on the correctness of the 2026 medical assessment, and the petitioner is not immune from lawful proceedings challenging his eligibility.
This judgment reinforces the need for procedural fairness and adherence to constitutional safeguards in service matters, particularly in cases involving confirmed employees and disability certifications.
Bottom Line:
Termination of a confirmed employee's service without adherence to principles of natural justice or the procedural safeguards under Article 311(2) of the Constitution is impermissible, particularly in the absence of fraud or misrepresentation.
Statutory provision(s):
Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India, Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996 (Rule 256)
Babu Ram v. State of Rajasthan, (Rajasthan) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2971973
