Contractual employees cannot be terminated without due process: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court recently held that contractual employees are entitled to be issued a notice with regard to the unsatisfactory nature of their service before they are terminated [Tintu K & Anr. v Union of India & Ors.]..Justice Anu Sivaraman opined that terminating the services of contractual employess on the ground of unsatisfactory performance without any notice is perverse. “Even though the petitioners are contractual employees, they were entitled to notice with regard to the unsatisfactory nature of their service and their services could have been terminated only on a finding being rendered on the same. In the instant case, such findings are conspicuous by their absence. Even in case the contention of the respondents is that the petitioners were not appointed after the full process of selection was carried out, it is not in dispute that they have been continuing in service on a contract basis from 2010 and 2016 onwards and the contention that they can be sent out of service on the specific ground of unsatisfactory performance without any notice or finding to that effect, according to me, is perversive,” the Court said..It was considering a petition moved by two contractual laborers who were appointed as an attender and part-time sweeper respectively in an Ayush NHM Homeo Dispensary at Mananthavadi.The case of the petitioners was that they were terminated by the employer according to his whims and fancies, even though they were appointed after the full process of selection, and they weren’t merely backdoor entrants.The petitioners had approached the court earlier too relying on several government orders related to contractual appointment. However, the Court had passed orders terminating the services of the petitioners on the ground that the government orders relied on by the petitioners were not applicable.The counsel for the Mananthavadi municipality argued that the petitioners are only contractual employees and that they do not have any indefeasible right to continue in service or any vested right to seek the permanency of their service..The Court noted from the material submitted by all parties that the primary reason for terminating the services of the petitioners were that their services were unsatisfactory.However, it noted that even though the petitioners were working for the municipality on contract basis for several years, they were not issued a notice with regard to the alleged unsatisfactory nature of their service and neither was a finding rendered on the same.Therefore, the Court set aside the order terminating them and directed the concerned authorities to permit the petitioners to continue in service as contractual employees in the Mananthavady Municipality.However, the Court clarified that it will not stand in the way of the municipality taking appropriate action against them in accordance with the law after issuing due notice..The petitioners were represented by advocates Kaleeswaram Raj, Shilpa Soman and Thulasi K Raj.The respondents were represented by advocates Mini Gopinath, Santharam P and VK Sunil..[Read Judgment]