MP High Court Quashes Termination of Permanent Worker Done Without Departmental Inquiry
The Madhya Pradesh High Court at Indore set aside two termination orders and a demotion order, holding that stigma-based dismissal without a formal departmental inquiry violates natural justice.
The High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore has quashed three orders issued against Akhilesh Nimawat, termination orders dated 15 April 2021 and 24 January 2022, and a reinstatement order dated 3 December 2021 that had demoted him from permanent worker to daily wager. Justice Jai Kumar Pillai, sitting singly, held that where termination is founded on allegations of misconduct, a show-cause notice and a discarded reply cannot substitute for a formal departmental inquiry. The court directed reinstatement with permanent status and ordered release of wages from December 2020 to 31 October 2021. The respondents were left free to initiate fresh departmental proceedings in accordance with law.
A Permanent Worker Reduced to Daily Wager
Nimawat began working as a daily wager on 1 March 1995. His services were first terminated on 28 March 2000. He approached the Labour Court, which reinstated him on 11 July 2002.
After roughly ten more years of service, he filed Writ Petition No. 5219/2012 before the High Court seeking permanent status. Acting on the court's order dated 12 September 2012, the respondents confirmed him as a permanent worker on 7 October 2017 and rectified his category to skilled worker on 29 June 2018.
On 13 January 2021, while he was performing his regular duties, Nimawat received a show-cause notice alleging that he had failed to follow instructions of the Sub-Divisional Officer and the Incident Commander, Ratlam. He replied on 14 January 2021, stating he had received no such instructions and that he had continued his regular tasks even while unwell.
The respondents found his reply unsatisfactory and terminated his services on 15 April 2021, without conducting any departmental inquiry. On 3 December 2021, following an assurance given by Nimawat on 31 October 2021 to perform duties sincerely, he was reinstated, but only as a daily-rated employee. After he made representations and sent a legal notice demanding permanent status and pending wages, his services were terminated again on 24 January 2022, with the respondents citing irregular attendance and an unwillingness to work.
The Competing Positions
Nimawat's counsel argued that the termination was executed without any formal departmental inquiry to establish the alleged misconduct, violating his fundamental and legal rights. He contended that the alleged instruction regarding fine collection for masks was never formally communicated to him, making it impermissible to punish him for non-compliance. He also argued that the reinstatement order of 3 December 2021 unlawfully ignored his confirmed permanent status, which had been secured through prior judicial intervention.
The State and respondent No. 2 countered that the show-cause notice had been issued for negligent behaviour, indiscipline, and disobedience of higher officials. They relied on government memorandums dated 7 October 2016 and 1 August 2017 to argue that a dismissed permanent employee cannot be reinstated with permanent status. They further submitted that after reinstatement, Nimawat showed irregular attendance and made legally impracticable demands, justifying the second termination.
Why the Termination Could Not Stand
Justice Pillai framed the core question as whether the termination complied with the principles of natural justice. On a bare perusal of the record, the court found it unequivocally clear that there was no such compliance before either termination order was issued.
The court observed that the respondents had proceeded by issuing a show-cause notice, treating the reply as unsatisfactory, and then terminating, without constituting any formal departmental inquiry. The court stated that even a contractual or daily-rated employee is entitled to the protection of natural justice when termination is founded on allegations of misconduct.
To fortify this position, Justice Pillai relied on the Division Bench decision in Malkhan Singh Malviya v. State of M.P., W.A. No. 1166/2017, decided on 8 March 2018. That judgment had held that where misconduct is the foundation of termination, a preliminary inquiry conducted behind the back of the employee and a reply to a show-cause notice cannot substitute for a proper inquiry before stigma is cast. The court quoted the passage directly: “The misconduct as alleged in the show cause notice and the preliminary inquiry conducted behind the back of the petitioner were the foundation of the termination.”
Applying that ratio, the court held that the allegations of disobedience and indiscipline were clearly the foundation of Nimawat's termination. Casting such a stigma without adducing evidence in a properly constituted inquiry was legally impermissible. The termination orders therefore could not be sustained.
On the reinstatement order of 3 December 2021, the court reasoned that since the initial termination was bad in law, the consequential order that arbitrarily changed Nimawat's category from permanent worker to daily wager also lacked legal sanctity. The government memorandums cited by the respondents could not override the judicial confirmation of his permanent status.
Order
The writ petition was allowed. The termination orders dated 15 April 2021 and 24 January 2022, and the reinstatement order dated 3 December 2021, all issued by respondent No. 2, were quashed and set aside.
The respondents were directed to reinstate Nimawat and allow him to continue performing his duty as a permanent worker. Payment of wages for the period from December 2020 to 31 October 2021 was directed to be released, if not already paid.
The court clarified that the order does not preclude the respondents from initiating fresh departmental proceedings against Nimawat for the alleged misconduct, provided they do so strictly in accordance with law and by affording him due opportunity of hearing. No order as to costs was made.