CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsDivision Bench(2011) 03 OHC CK 0053

Monalisa Behera vs State of Orissa and Others

Orissa High Court · Decided on 28 March 2011 · Citation: (2011) 112 CLT 81 : (2011) 1 OLR 963 : (2011) 112 PLJR 81

HON’BLE JUDGES
B.P. Das, J · B.K. Misra, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (C) No. 2964 of 2011

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 355 words
1.

Heard Learned Counsel for the Petitioner.

2.

The Petitioner, who was working as a Part Time Guest Instructor on contractual basis has filed this writ application challenging the Order Dated 1.2.2011 passed by Opp. Party No. 3 in Annexure 11 on the allegation that the said order has been passed without following the principles of natural justice.

3.

As it appears, order in Annexure-11 has been passed on the allegation that the Petitioner has not maintained or followed any lesson plan or progress plan. Her teaching skill was not up to the mark, for which she had been disallowed to take the classes with effect from 2.2.2011 & her engagement in that institution was cancelled.

4.

According to Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, the Petitioner had not been given an opportunity of hearing to defend her case or to present her part of defence before the authority.

5.

We would have issued notice in this case, but we find from the impugned order that the said order, which is dated 1.2.2011 has been passed pursuant to a surprise inspection made on 31.1.2011.

6.

As the order impugned has been passed on the next day of the inspection without affording an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner, we are of the opinion, even if the Petitioner is not a regular employee, the principle of natural justice demands that the authority should have afforded an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner before taking action which would ultimately involve civil consequence & prejudicially affect the Petitioner (See: Mrs. Maneka Gandhi Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Another, ).

7.

In view of such, we set aside the order No. 252 dated 1.2.2011 passed by the Principal, Industrial Training Institute, Rourkela in Annexure-11 & direct the Principal to allow the Petitioner to join in her engagement. At the same time we direct the Petitioner that if there is any mistake on her part, she shall rectify herself & act according to the direction and rule, which she has to follow while working in contractual basis.

8.

The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of.

9.

Issue urgent certified copy.