Chandigarh, April 6
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that mere registration of an FIR is not enough to terminate the services of an employee; the holding of an inquiry is essential before initiating such action.

The ruling comes on a petition filed by a patwari, Sukhwinder Singh, against the state of Punjab and another respondent. In his petition placed before Justice MM Kumar, the petitioner had sought directions for quashing the suspension and the termination orders.

Taking up the matter, Justice Kumar ruled: “It is conceded position that the petitioner was appointed on regular basis as patwari on January 29, 1987. An FIR, dated July 5,1989, under Sections 465, 467, 471 and 420 IPC was registered against him, which constituted the basis for suspension, as well as termination.

“According to the petitioner, the FIR did not disclose that any voucher or authority was given to him to withdraw any amount from the treasury…. When the matter came up for consideration before a Division Bench of this court, the operation of termination order was stayed on August 17, 1989, and the stay order was reiterated on September 13, 1989. The petition was eventually admitted.

“In the written statement broad facts are admitted. However, it has been claimed that the petitioner’s services could be terminated with a month’s notice. A copy of the appointment letter dated January 29, 1987, has been placed on record....

“There are serious allegations of embezzlement against the petitioner.... He was arrested and a sum of Rs. 70,000 was recovered from him. There is nothing on record to show as to the subsequent progress of the case or the result of the FIR.

“However, the same may not be necessary to decide the fate of the termination order. Having heard the state counsel, I am of the view that termination order passed by the respondents is un-sustainable in the eyes of law because no such order could have been passed without holding an inquiry.

“The termination order appears to have been passed merely on the registration of the FIR. Accordingly, the termination order is set aside. However, quashing of termination order would not affect either the criminal proceedings or disciplinary proceedings, which might have been initiated against the petitioner after registration of the FIR.”