The Single Judge dismissed the appellant's challenge to his termination from a government contract post (General Manager). The parties agreed to withdraw the termination order and issue a neutral communication. The appeal disposed upon this agreement without judicial interference.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~9
UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr Rakesh Kumar, CGSC for UOI Mr Rishi Jant Singh, Adv for R-2 & 3
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL
The challenge in this appeal is to the order dated 09.03.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge of this court by which the writ petition No. 6287/2015 was dismissed.
The facts which led to the filing of the writ petition are that the appellant was employed with respondent No. 2. Pursuant to 4 vacancies arising for the post of General Manager including General Manager (Finance & Administration) an advertisement was published on 03.01.2013. The appellant herein applied for the said post and the Search and Selection Committee recommended the name of the appellant for the post of General Manager (Finance & Administration) on 14.06.2013. The appointment letter was issued on 19.07.2013. On 07.08.2013 the appellant joined the respondent No. 2 on a contract of 5 years which was to be renewed every year subject to the satisfactory performance of the appellant. This contract was, however, not renewed and an order of termination was passed on 06.05.2015.
The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the order of termination is stigmatic in nature which is disputed by learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 on instructions. He submits that the aim, objective and purpose of the communication issued was not to cast any stigma on the working of the appellant. This matter was adjourned to enable learned counsel for the parties to seek appropriate instructions. It has been agreed before us that the letter of termination would stand withdrawn and in place the respondent No. 2 would issue the following communication to the appellant:-
“ TO WHOMSOEVER IT MAY CONCERN It is stated that Shri Satish Joshi has worked in CMSS from 13.08.2013 to 05.07.2015 on contract as General Manager (Finance). His last working day was on 03.07.2015. We wish him all the best. This has been issued with the concurrence of the Competent Authority.
(R.C. Nayak) General Manager (Admn.) Shri Satish Joshi 237A, Pocket J&K, Dilshad Garden Delhi-95.”
In view of the stand taken by the parties as agreed, the present appeal is disposed of. It is agreed that all disputes, differences, claims and counter claims, if any, stand satisfied.
G.S.SISTANI, J
SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J
SEPTEMBER 10, 2018 SU
Satish Joshi
Union of India
G.S. Sistani
Sangita Dhingra Sehgal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
