HC reinstates peon dismissed for taking tea, biscuits from office

Pioneer News Service
Ranchi

The Jharkhand High Court recently ordered the reinstatement of a contractual peon who was dismissed from his job at the District Rural Development Agency (DRDA) on allegations that he had taken tea powder and biscuits from his office.

In its June 25 order, the Court held that the punishment was grossly disproportionate and that the termination violated the principles of natural justice.

A Division Bench of Chief Justice M S Sonak and Justice Rajesh Shankar last week set aside the 2022 termination order and directed authorities to reinstate Ranjeet Kumar Himanshu by July 1, with 50% back wages to be paid by July 31. The Bench also directed the Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro, to file compliance affidavits before the court after reinstatement and payment of dues.

Himanshu was appointed as a contractual peon with the DRDA in 2005 and continued in service for nearly 17 years. According to the court, in March 2022, he was served a show-cause notice alleging that he had taken “some material” from the office for personal use. According to records before the court, the notice did not specify what the material was. His services were terminated in May 2022, after the authorities held that his explanation in response to the notice was “not satisfactory”.

Challenging the termination, Himanshu approached the Jharkhand High Court. However, the single-judge Bench dismissed his petition this January. He then appealed before a larger Bench.

During the hearing, counsel for Himanshu submitted that the items referred to in the show-cause notice were leftover tea powder and a few biscuits, which had later been returned. ‘As vague as vagueness can be.’

The High Court observed that the show-cause notice was “as vague as vagueness can be” because it failed to identify the material allegedly taken, and held that a vague notice could not satisfy the principles of natural justice. The Bench further found that the termination order assigned no reasons and failed to consider the employee’s explanation, his nearly 17 years of service or the impact the dismissal would have on his family.

It concluded that even if it were assumed that he had taken tea and biscuits from the office, dismissal from service was “grossly disproportionate” and “shocks the conscience”, adding that it amounted to “injustice brimming with insensitivity”.