The Madras High Court has declared that the Government has indirect liability to compensate the loss caused to any person by the mistake committed by its employees.
The Madurai Court clarified that an employee who loses his job due to mistakes of his superior is entitled to claim monetary compensation for loss of service. The Court stated that the Government cannot on its own “sweet will“After fourteen years, the appointment of an employee will be declared temporary and will be canceled when determined by the Government”pleased to do so.“
A single bank Judge RN Manjula noticed: “So far as this petitioner is concerned, there is no allegation against him that he suppressed any material fact to secure an appointment in the fourth respondent Union. Due to the appointing authority’s error in not following the communal rotation guidelines, the petitioner cannot be sanctioned or made a scapegoat. The Government, as a model employer, cannot adopt such atrocious practices as canceling the appointment of a person after fourteen long years due to the fault of the official involved in the recruitment.“
Lawyer H. Mohammed Imran represented the petitioner, while Spl GP M. Lingadurai appeared for the respondents.
The petitioner (employee) was appointed as a jeep driver through the Employment Exchange of Krishnarayapuram Panchayat Union (Panchayat). The employee challenged the cancellation of his appointment after 14 years of service. The cancellation order stated that the employee was wrongly appointed in the place reserved for Scheduled Castes (Arunthathiyars preferentially) in respect of communal rotation.
The Panchayat justified this cancellation by stating that the appointment was made on a temporary basis. However, the Court noted that although the appointment order stated that the employee had been appointed temporarily, he was kept under the Contributory Pension Scheme (CPS). This fact, according to the Court, was also reflected in the appointment order.
The Court stated that “The Government has the indirect responsibility to compensate the loss caused to any person in view of the mistake committed by its own employees. Even if the matter is looked at from that perspective, the petitioner who would lose his services due to the mistake of his superior would be entitled to claim the monetary benefits associated with his loss of service as compensation.“
Therefore, the Court held: “Instead of assuming such responsibility, it would be ideal for the respondents to continue engaging the services of the petitioner by allowing him to continue in service. Not even the petitioner has stated that he has chosen to seek compensation instead of obtaining his reinstatement. It is reiterated that the petitioner’s services have been terminated through no fault of his own.“
Accordingly, the Court ordered the defendants to reinstate the employee to service and ordered that “The period during which the petitioner was out of service until his reinstatement shall be treated as continuity of service with all other monetary and attendant benefits including back wages.“
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the petition.
Title of the case: R. Sasikumar v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors.
Appearance:
Petitioner: Lawyer H. Mohammed Imran
Surveyed: Spl GP M. Lingadurai; Addl GP G. Suriya Ananth
Click here to read/download the Order
