Dr. H. Siddaiah vs The Commissioner, Bruhath Bangalore Mahanagara Palike, Bangalore, The Vice Chairman, Health Officer (West), Revised National Tuberculosis Control Programme, Bruhath Bangalore Mahanagara Palike, Malleshwaram, Bangalore and Project Co-Coordinator (TB) Bruhath Bangalore Mahanagara Palike, Opposite to Town Hall, Bangalore

Anand Byrareddy

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents.

The limited question in this petition is whether the order of termination issued to the petitioner is invalid. The petitioner is said to have been appointed as a Medical Officer under a contract for a period of one year from 28.09.2010. It however transpires that the Project Coordinator who was supervising his work, was dissatisfied with his performance and had issued notice dated 29.10.2010 that the petitioner was not attending to his duties with diligence and accordingly had terminated his services in terms of the contract and a further order dated 17.06.2011 was issued terminating his services for negligence and irresponsibility towards work. It is this which is sought to be questioned by the petitioner.

The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the term of contract in the usual course, has spent itself out. The petitioner does not seek reinstatement or any other financial benefit. The petitioner, however, would complain that he has been unreasonably accused of negligence and irresponsibility at work and has been terminated prematurely by an officer who was not competent to do so. Apart from casting a stigma on him as a professional, the very order of termination is invalid as it has been passed by an incompetent authority.

The learned counsel for the respondent''s, however'', would raise a serious objection to the petition being entertained and would submit that the order of appointment indeed was issued by the Project Coordinator and therefore, the order of termination also being issued by the said authority, cannot be invalid and the contract having been terminated giving one month''s notice, there is no infirmity in the order of termination.

However, as seen from the order of appointment, the Project Coordinator no doubt has issued the same but he was merely acting as a correspondent of the Selection Committee and the appointment order itself placed on him a condition that the petitioner could be terminated from service only by the Commissioner of the BBMP. In that view of the matter, the notice of termination and the termination order itself having been issued by the Project Coordinator, was by an incompetent officer and could not have been issued to the petitioner and the same is certainly, invalid. Accordingly, Annexure-"E" stands quashed.