Whether termination of employee without giving reason is justified in service law? Arbritrarily remove me from the service and blocked all communication, including the employee’s ID, without providing any discernible reason. Despite being a permanent employee of this nationalised bank (SBI), the grounds for termination remain unexplained. In light of this situation, what recourse is available for me to seek reinstatement?
Asked from: Uttar Pradesh
The employer (bank) cannot terminate its employee without stating the ground and providing an opportunity of hearing. This is the fundamental principle of a fair justice even in the administrative sphere that the person must have an opportunity to be heard before taking any adverse action against him.
Therefore, the act of the employer (bank) is prima facie unjust, illegal and violation of the principle of natural justice. It also violates the provisions of the State Bank of India Officers Service Rules, 1992.
According to Rule 20 of the State Bank of India Officers Service Rules, 1992, an officer shall not leave or discontinue his service in the Bank without first giving a notice in writing of his intention to leave or discontinue the service or resign.
Termination without any notice not only violates the above rule but also infringes the fundamental right enshrined in Article 21 of the constitution. Right to livelihood is an integral part of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to a procedure established by law.
Article 21
The term ‘Life’ as outlined in Article 21 of the Constitution goes beyond the basic act of breathing. It extends beyond mere animal existence or the monotonous routine of survival. It encompasses a broader spectrum, encompassing the right to live with human dignity, the right to livelihood, the right to health, the right to breathe pollution-free air, and more.
In the case of Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation AIR 1986 SC 180, commonly referred to as the ‘Pavement Dwellers Case,’ the Supreme Court has held that the right to livelihood is inherently connected to the right to life. The court reasoned that no individual can sustain life without the means of living, i.e., a source of livelihood. Expanding on this, the Court emphasised:
“The scope of the right to life guaranteed by Article 21 is extensive and all-encompassing. It does not solely imply the preservation of life from extinguishment or deprivation, such as in the case of the imposition and execution of a death sentence, except as per the established legal procedure. While this is one dimension of the right to life, an equally crucial aspect is the right to livelihood because the ability to live is inseparable from the means of livelihood.”
Olga Tellis Vs. BMC AIR 1986 SC 180
The bank cannot terminate its employee without following the due procedure of law. The termination of an employee by the bank must adhere to the prescribed legal procedures. The State Bank of India Officers Service Rules, 1992, has been established to safeguard employees from any arbitrary actions by higher authorities within the SBI.
This regulatory framework ensures that due process is followed in matters of employee termination, providing a protective measure against any potential abuse of authority by the higher echelons of the State Bank of India.
You have been terminated in violation of the due process. Hence, you should file a writ petition before the High Court for quashing of the termination order. That order is unjust, illegal and in violation of the fundamental right. When the fundamental right of the citizen is being infringed by the state, the aggrieved person can directly approach the high court under Article 226 of the constitution of India.
Since you have been illegally deprived from the right to livelihood hence, you can seek appropriate remedy i.e. quashing of termination order, from the High Court. The bank has committed grave error because termination of employee without giving or citing reason is violating the principle of natural justice. For more legal help please visit Kanoon India.
Related
My wife has recently resigned from her job and filed a maintenance case, demanding 30k per month. The details of my case are as follows: Duration of marriage: 1 year [lived separately since day 1] Children: Nil Marriage Act: Special Marriage Act. Wife’s Education: BCOM + completed a company accountant course + cleared IPCC exams. Currently appearing for CA final exams. Wife’s Employment: She was gainfully employed in an MNC private sector accounting firm, earning Rs 50K. However, she resigned two months before filing the petition. Wife’s Residence: She is staying with her parents but is not mentioned in the petition. Husband’s Education [Me]: BE, Husband’s Residence: Rented Husband’s Occupation: I was employed as an engineer in a mid-scale company, earning 70k.
However, I have resigned and am now seeking higher position jobs. Husband’s Liability: I have a personal loan for my brother’s marriage of 3L, paying EMI 15k per month. As we have never lived together, do not have any children, and she is well-educated and was gainfully employed even after marriage, it seems she has purposefully resigned to mentally harass me.
Asked from: Kerala
It is astonishing to see that a wife, who spent only a day with her husband, is now claiming maintenance. Maintenance is a responsibility of the husband because after marriage he becomes the natural guardian of his wife. Therefore, for maintenance, the matrimonial relationship must be existing between the spouses.
Section 125 of the code of criminal procedure (crpc) also incorporated the existence of marriage as a necessary element for claiming maintenance. If the wife is living apart without any reason, it proves that the wife has separated herself from the matrimonial obligations. In order to claim maintenance, the wife has to prove herself a dutiful wife. Failing which she cannot claim maintenance. As per sub section 4 of section 125 crpc, wife cannot claim maintenance if:
- she is living in adultery, or
- without any sufficient reason, she refuses to live with her husband, or
- they are living separately by mutual consent.
Your wife is living separately after the first day of marriage. She never intended to resume her matrimonial life because she has no faith or belief in the marriage. Hence, she cannot claim to be a wife only for claiming maintenance.
The law is very clear, if a wife does not want to perform her matrimonial obligation she is not entitled to claim maintenance. If the wife has sufficient reasons for living apart e.g. cruelty or bigamy of husband then she is entitled for maintenance if her husband refuses or neglects to maintain her.
There must be sufficient reasons for living separately from the husband. When the wife claims maintenance living separately from the husband, she has to prove the guilt of the husband behind such a living. It does not matter that the wife has no intention to resume the matrimonial life. If the husband is the guilty party then the wife even getting divorce has the right to receive maintenance from her divorced husband.
Your wife shall not get maintenance if you prove with evidence that the wife is living apart without any sufficient reasons. You should file your objection and contest this case. No need to worry because the wife is bound to prove that living separately is a fair decision based upon the guilt of the husband. For more legal help please visit Kanoon India.
Related:
Can I force a person to marry after his refusal? I met someone through a matrimony group’s marriage advertisement, and for three months, he has been in touch with me through phone calls and messages. We were dating, had a meeting, and shared a room, during which he expressed his intention to marry me. However, I recently discovered that he has been in a relationship with another woman for the past four years. He claims that this is the reason he cannot marry me. How can I legally compel him to marry me?
Asked from: Andhra Pradesh
You cannot force a person to marry if he has refused your proposal. Forcing an individual into marriage is legally untenable once they have declined a proposal. Matrimonial websites serve as platforms for identifying suitable partners, and the decision to marry is ideally a mutual one, devoid of compulsion or coercion. If the person in question has an alternative choice and, as a result, rejects the proposal, legal recourse may not be pursued.
Regarding matters of dating, meetings, and emotional attachment, legal action can be initiated if the individual is found to have engaged in cheating or physical and sexual exploitation. The termination of emotional attachment, however, does not constitute an offense. Sexual exploitation under the false promise of marriage is deemed a criminal offense and can escalate to rape if consent for sexual intercourse was obtained under the pretext of marriage.
Instances of physical or financial exploitation can lead to charges of hurt, grievous hurt, or extortion, depending on the circumstances. If these facts are substantiated in a given case, legal action can be taken against the individual. However, compelling someone into marriage after a fair refusal at the initial stage holds no legal standing.
It is recommended to carefully analyze the specific details of the case and seek assistance from a local lawyer for lodging FIR or initiation of legal action against him, particularly if there are elements of cheating, exploitation, or sexual misconduct involved. For more legal help please visit Kanoon India.
My neighbour has damaged my boundary wall. His house is in centre of street and we have two gate front and behind which open in two different streets one street is wider and other street is very narrow, The problem is my neighbour bought house in narrow street which is right next to his own house in wider street and merged it with his house in wider street and did some construction this all happened 5 years ago and now I believe that my neighbour during construction decreased the thickness of my boundary wall between my house and that house in narrow street which he bought from 9 inch to 4 inch What should I do next Please help me it would be a great help.
Asked from: Uttrakhand
Your neighbour has damaged your boundary wall by shaving it during construction of his house. This is a mischievous act which constitutes an offence punishable under Section 427 IPC (Indian Penal Code). Here’s the text of the section:
Whoever commits mischief and thereby causes loss or damage to the amount of fifty rupees or upwards, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
Section 427 IPC
Certainly, Section 427 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) pertains to the offence of “Mischief causing damage to the property” In the context of a boundary wall, if someone intentionally damages the wall, and the cost of repairing the damage is fifty rupees or more, this section could be invoked.
You should file a complaint against your neighbour for the commission of aforesaid offence. In the prevailing situation you can also initiate civil action against your neighbour for making good the loss to your boundary wall and infringement of your property right. You can file a civil suit for damages and claim compensation for the reconstruction of the boundary wall. For more legal help please visit Kanoon India.
Read also:
Police has arrested my brother from village and kept him in illegal detention. A special team of Delhi Police has apprehended my brother in our village in Bharatpur, Rajasthan. Subsequently, the police personnel took him with them to Delhi. I possess CCTV footage that substantiates my brother’s arrest in his village. Despite my inquiries, I have received no information regarding his current whereabouts. I am concerned that my brother may face an encounter with the Delhi Police. Please provide assistance.
Asked from: Delhi
Based on the available information, it appears that your brother was arrested in Rajasthan. However, it is concerning that the special police team has not obtained transit remand and is detaining him. According to legal procedures, when an arrest is made, the arrested person must be presented before the court within twenty-four hours from the time of arrest.
The police have power under Section 48 crpc (Code of Criminal Procedure) to arrest a person beyond territorial jurisdiction of its police station. When a police officer arrests an individual outside their jurisdiction, it becomes mandatory for the police to obtain a transit remand. This involves presenting the accused before the Magistrate of the area where the arrest took place, ensuring legal authorization for the detainment.
Detaining a person for more than twenty-four hours constitutes a violation of the fundamental rights outlined in Article 22 of the Constitution of India, as well as the provisions of Section 167 of crpc.
An arrested person possesses the fundamental right to be presented before a judicial magistrate promptly, and in all instances, within twenty-four hours from the time of arrest.
The absence of transit remand itself indicates that the detainee has not been brought before the court, rendering such an arrest illegal. Article 22 of the Indian Constitution safeguards the rights of individuals who are arrested or detained.
Every person who is arrested and detained in custody must be produced before the nearest magistrate within 24 hours of the arrest (excluding travel time). Detention beyond this period requires the authority of a magistrate. No person who is arrested shall be detained in custody without being informed of the grounds for such arrest. They also have the right to consult and be defended by a legal practitioner of their choice.
Article 22 Constitution of India
In the prevailing situation you should immediately file a “Habeas Corpus” writ petition (under Article 226) in the High Court of Rajasthan in whose territorial jurisdiction your brother is arrested. Also adduce CCTV footage to prove the place and time of arrest. The facts of your case clearly indicate that such an arrest is illegal.
The Habeas Corpus writ is primarily a safeguard against arbitrary arrest and detention. It is a legal instrument that protects an individual’s right to personal liberty by ensuring that they are not unlawfully deprived of their freedom.
The purpose of the Habeas Corpus writ is to secure the immediate release of a person who is detained or imprisoned unlawfully. It is an extraordinary remedy that is invoked to bring the detainee before the court, along with evidence justifying the legality of the detention.
Hence, the High Court may order to release the detained person (your brother) immediately from the custody of Delhi Police. The High Court may also direct the government to compensate the detained person against illegal arrest. For more legal help please visit Kanoon India.
Mutation of government land occupied by parent on lease. We have a lease deed land from govt. Our father had expired and he had the possession on the land but construction is not done. Our mother has also expired. As legal heir me and my sister wants build one house of our own with housing plan. We do not want to do mutation. As we both are the only legal heirs. So if we get a housing plan shall we construct a house of our own. please advise.
Asked from: Uttar Pradesh
The term “mutation” typically refers to the process of updating land records to reflect changes in ownership or occupancy. When government land is leased to individuals or entities, any subsequent changes, such as transfer of lease or change in occupancy, may require a mutation of the land records. For more legal help please visit Kanoon India.
Construction on rooftop. I have a second story with a rooftop and want to build a one-room set on the terrace, but I’m afraid he’ll halt the construction by calling the police or filing a complaint against me. He also filed a civil court case against me for water dampening in the walls and he already knows the problem is coming from adjacent building and not ours. What can i do?
Asked from: Delhi
Upon obtaining the necessary approval from the relevant authority, you are eligible to construct a one-room setup on the terrace, that construction must be in strict adherence to the local building regulations. Any concerns related to a pending civil suit should not cause undue worry. You can construct proposed one-room set flat on terrace if there is no stay order in respect of the property.
In the event of a court-issued stay order concerning future construction, it is advisable to file an application for the removal of the stay. In the context of your case, the water dampening issue is attributed to the faulty construction of an adjacent building and is unrelated to your property. If a stay order has been issued by the court, consider challenging it based on a technical survey.
Obtain a report on the cause of dampening from a reputable civil engineering firm or a company specializing in civil construction. Present this report to the court and request the vacation of the stay order.
You have another option. If court agrees, you can do the same (technical investigation of dampening issue) through the commission appointed by the civil court. Move an application under Section 75 of the Code of Civil Procedure for appointment of commissioner. The court may appoint a technical expert (commissioner) for technical investigation of the building towards dampening issue.
Related: How to stop unauthorized construction
