The Supreme Court has delivered a crucial ruling concerning the rights of government servants, making it clear that a public employee cannot be removed from service merely because a criminal case is pending against them. This protection is especially vital when the employee was never even granted a fair opportunity to present their side of the story. A bench comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Sheel Nagu declared the dismissal of a constable unlawful, pointing out that the termination order was issued solely due to a pending trial rather than any actual conviction.
Bench Highlights Lack of Legal Basis for Dismissal
Elaborating on the case, the court noted that the appellant was removed from his job not because he was found guilty of a criminal charge, but simply because a case remained unresolved against him. Furthermore, he was denied any chance to defend himself. The judges observed that they found no provision in law empowering a government employer to dismiss an individual who had served in the police department for over a decade based only on a pending legal proceeding. Consequently, the decision to sack the employee could not be legally sustained under any circumstances.
Compensation Awarded Under Article 142
Although more than two decades had elapsed since the incident, preventing the court from ordering direct reinstatement back into active service, the bench invoked its extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution. Exercising this authority, the Supreme Court directed the Punjab government to pay the appellant a sum of 5 lakh rupees as monetary compensation for the unlawful termination.
Background of the Service Dispute
The roots of this legal battle stretch back several decades. The appellant was initially inducted into the Punjab Police in 1991 as a Special Police Officer. Following a selection process, he was subsequently chosen for appointment as a constable in the 1st Indian Reserve Battalion based in Patiala. However, matters took a turn in August 2002 when he was barred from joining his assigned duties, leading to the prolonged litigation that ultimately reached the apex court.
