Madhya Pradesh High Court Laments At Bureaucrats Passing Orders Being Oblivious To Principles Of Natural Justice, Manifesting Heedlessness

Justice Sanjay Dwivedi was essentially dealing with a writ petition, wherein the Petitioner was challenging the order passed by the Collector, District Betul, whereby his contractual service as Gram Rojgar Sahayak was terminated for his alleged actions of misappropriating government money.

The case of the Petitioner was that he was neither given an opportunity to put across his case to the authorities nor was any enquiry conducted against him for his alleged financial irregularity. He argued that the conduct of the authority was absolutely illegal and further infringed the provisions of policy framed by M.P. Rajya Rojgar Guarantee Council, wherein it laid down the guidelines to regulate Gram Rojgar Sahayaks. The said guidelines, he submitted, stipulates the manner in which the contractual services can be terminated. He asserted that according to the guidelines, his services could not have been terminated on the ground of any misconduct, without providing him with a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

The Petitioner submitted that it is a settled principle of law that any order passed by the authority which carries civil consequences, cannot be passed without giving opportunity of hearing to the person concerned. He placed his reliance on the order passed by the Court in Om Prakash Bhalavi v. State of M.P. & Ors., whereby the operation of order, terminating the contract services was stayed and the petition was pending for final ordain.

Finding merit in the submissions of the Petitioner that the order was passed contrary to the guidelines and without following the principles of natural justice, the Court observed-

Much to the surprise, the Collector, being a head of the District holding such a responsible post, is unenlightened of the provisions contained in the policy, under which Gram Rojgar Sahayaks are appointed or their services are terminated. Indeed, it is the consistent view of the Court that any order passed violating the principles of natural justice is illegal and is not sustainable in the eyes of law. However, by issuing such type of order, the authority in one sense, is providing aid to the persons like petitioner to fetch an interim order from this Court, which would ostensibly tantamount to external support. Inevitably, whether the petitioner remained involved in any financial irregularity, is the subject matter of enquiry, which would definitely unravel the complexities.

Rather than keeping the petition pending, the Court found it apposite to set aside the impugned order, holding the same to be illegal and unsustainable in the eyes of law. It remitted the matter to the authorities concerned, for taking appropriate action against the Petitioner after following the principles of natural justice or the procedure as has been laid down in the policy of M.P. Rojgar Guarantee Council.

The Court further directed that a copy of the order be sent to the Chief Secretary of the State to ensure that they have knowledge regarding the methodology followed by their subordinates while passing order such as the one challenged in the case in hand-

Let a copy of this order be forwarded to the Chief Secretary so as to keep him abreast about dispensing of official obligations by the subordinates wholly oblivious to the principles of natural justice and manifesting their heedlessness in passing the order.

Case Title: DILEEP KUMAR YADAV S/O MOHAN YADAV  v. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ORS.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (MP) 64

Click Here To Read/Download Order