The Supreme Court of India has ruled that once a termination order is set aside, the natural and automatic consequence is that the employee should be reinstated in service. This ruling was delivered in the case of Anantdeep Singh vs. The High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh & Anr. [Miscellaneous Application No. 267 of 2024 in Civil Appeal No. 3082 of 2022], where the Court directed the reinstatement of a judicial officer, Mr. Anantdeep Singh, whose termination had been overturned.
Background of the Case
The appellant, Anantdeep Singh, a judicial officer in the Punjab Civil Services (Judicial Branch), was appointed in December 2006. His service was terminated in December 2009 while he was still on probation, following allegations of an illicit relationship with a lady judicial officer and other complaints lodged by his wife and mother-in-law. Despite a satisfactory work report, the High Court’s Full Court decided to terminate his services based on these allegations.
Singh challenged his termination order before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, but his petition was dismissed in 2018. Interestingly, a similar petition filed by the lady judicial officer, who was also terminated based on the same set of allegations, was allowed by the High Court, and she was reinstated in service. Singh subsequently approached the Supreme Court, which, in its judgment dated April 20, 2022, set aside both the High Court’s order and the termination order against him, directing the High Court to reconsider the matter.
Legal Issues Involved
1. Reinstatement Following Quashing of Termination Orders:
The core issue before the Supreme Court was whether the employee, whose termination order had been set aside by the Court, should be immediately reinstated into service or if the employer could delay the reinstatement pending further proceedings. The Court held that once a termination order is set aside, the employee is deemed to be in service and must be reinstated immediately.
2. Retrospective Application of Termination Orders:
The Supreme Court also examined whether a fresh termination order could be issued with retrospective effect. The Court concluded that a termination order could not be backdated and should be effective only from the date it is served upon the employee. The termination cannot have retrospective effect as it would violate principles of natural justice.
3. Requirement of Fair Inquiry and Procedural Fairness:
The Supreme Court scrutinized whether a probationer’s services could be terminated without a formal inquiry and based solely on preliminary investigations or allegations. The Court emphasized the necessity of a fair process and the requirement to provide an opportunity for the employee to respond to allegations before termination, even during the probation period.
Supreme Court’s Decision
The judgment, delivered by Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Prasanna Bhalachandra Varale, clarified that when a termination order is set aside, the employee must be considered to be in continuous service. The Court observed:
“Once the termination order is set aside and the judgment of the High Court dismissing the writ petition challenging the said termination order has also been set aside, the natural consequence is that the employee should be taken back in service and thereafter proceeded with as per the directions. Once the termination order is set aside, then the employee is deemed to be in service.”
The Court expressed disapproval of the inaction of the Punjab and Haryana High Court and the State of Punjab for failing to reinstate Singh immediately after its earlier order dated April 20, 2022. The bench noted that no action was taken to either reinstate Singh or to decide on his back wages, despite the Supreme Court setting aside the termination.
Directions on Reinstatement and Back Wages
The Supreme Court directed that Singh should be paid his full salary from the date of its judgment on April 20, 2022, until the issuance of the fresh termination order dated April 2, 2024. Additionally, the Court ruled that Singh is entitled to 50% of back wages from December 18, 2009 (the day after his original termination) until April 19, 2022, recognizing his continuous service status.
The Court also granted Singh the liberty to challenge the subsequent resolution of the High Court’s Full Court dated August 3, 2023, and the termination order dated April 2, 2024, before the High Court.
Senior Advocate P.S. Patwalia represented the appellant, while Senior Advocate Nidhesh Gupta appeared for the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, and Additional Advocate General Gaurav Dhama represented the State of Punjab.
Justice Vikram Nath, writing for the bench, emphasized:
“We find no justification in the inaction of the High Court and also the State in not taking back the appellant into service after the order dated 20.04.2022. No decision was taken either by the High Court or by the State of taking back the appellant into service and no decision was made regarding the back wages from the date the termination order had been passed till the date of reinstatement.”
Case Title: Anantdeep Singh vs. The High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh & Anr.
Case No.: M.A. No. 267 of 2024 in C.A. No. 3082 of 2022
Bench: Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Prasanna Bhalachandra Varale
