THE POST GRADUATE INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, CHANDIGARH AND ANOTHER Vs. SHAM LAL AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal of the defendant - Post Graduate Institute of Medical, Education and Research at Chandigarh, filed through its Director, would have succeeded on merits after crossing a number of technical hurdles placed in its way, were it not for the last contention raised by Shri Bhandari, the learned counsel for Shri Sham Lal plaintiff-respondent No. 1.

(2.) Shri Sham Lal had filed this suit for declaration, challenging an order dated 17-10-1968, Exhibit D. 1, passed by the Director of the appellant Institute, terminating the plaintiff-respondent's temporary services as a Clerk of the Institute, in accordance with paragraph 2 of the letter of appointment, Exhibit D 2, dated 25-10-1963, with an offer of salary and allowances in lieu of one month's notice stipulated in the appointment letter. The impugned order does not show, on the face of it, that the termination of plaintiff-respondent's services had been ordered as a punishment or penalty and there is nothing in this order which may seem to carry a stigma reducing the plaintiff respondent's future prospects in the matter of securing employment elsewhere.

(3.) The trial Court had decreed the suit and the judgment and decree had been affirmed on first appeal filed by the defendant-Institute The Institute had therefore, to come up in further appeal to this Court. The Courts below may appear to have probed into the departmental files in order to come to the finding that the termination of the appellants services had been ordered as a punishment or penalty. This was in complete disregard of a string of rulings of the High Courts and the Supreme Court of India on the question of the nature of tenure of such temporary employees where their services were terminated in accordance with the conditions of their service. It would be helpful if relevant portions of the appointment letter relating to the plaintiff respondent and the impugned order were reproduced at this stage. Paragraph 2 of the appointment letter, Exhibit D. 2, runs as follows:-