RAVINDRA KUMAR MISRA versus U.P. STATE HANDLOOM CORPORATION LTD. & ANR.

RAVINDRA KUMAR MISRA versus U.P. STATE HANDLOOM CORPORATION LTD. & ANR.

The order terminating the appellant's services was in innocuous terms, did not attach stigma, and was not based on misconduct. The appellant, being a temporary servant with no right to the post, was not entitled to a formal hearing of natural justice before termination. Therefore, the termination does not amount to...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Rabindra Kumar Misra; Respondent: U.P. State Handloom Corporation Ltd. & Anr.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
15 October 1987
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Judgment and Order of Allahabad High Court Dated 6.5.1985
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Termination of Temporary Service, Punitive Dismissal, Natural Justice, Service Rules
Employment Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Termination of Temporary Service Punitive Dismissal Natural Justice Service Rules

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rabindra Kumar Misra

Appellant

U.P. State Handloom Corporation Ltd. & Anr.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Judgment and Order of Allahabad High Court Dated 6.5.1985

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the order terminating temporary employment was punitive or amounted to dismissal
  2. 2 Whether principles of natural justice required a hearing before termination
  3. 3 Whether protection under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution applies

Ratio Decidendi

The order terminating the appellant's services was in innocuous terms, did not attach stigma, and was not based on misconduct. The appellant, being a temporary servant with no right to the post, was not entitled to a formal hearing of natural justice before termination. Therefore, the termination does not amount to punitive dismissal and is not open to challenge.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • U.P. State Handloom Corporation to pay appellant a consolidated amount of Rs.25,000 within one month
  • No order for costs