Appointment Order - The Deciding Factor

Facts:

The Appellant appointed the respondent as a Bio-Chemist at its medical institute on a contractual basis for one year in 1994, which was later extended for three years. After completing this term, the respondent’s contract was not renewed, leading him to challenge the decision before the Educational Appellate Tribunal, claiming he was a permanent employee. The Tribunal ruled against the respondent, stating he was not permanently appointed. The respondent then filed a writ petition, which the learned Single Judge allowed, directing his reinstatement and awarding compensation. The petitioner appealed this decision, arguing that the respondent’s name was listed as a permanent employee only to secure university recognition for a course, not as a confirmation of his employment.

In this case, the Appellant filed a writ appeal against an earlier order that reinstated the Respondent as a permanent employee. The Respondent, initially appointed as a Bio-Chemist on a contract basis, contested the non-renewal of the employment. The dispute went through multiple legal proceedings before reaching the Karnataka High Court.

Issue:

The core issue was whether the Respondent was a permanent employee. The Educational Appellate Tribunal had ruled against the Respondent, stating that permanent employment status was not established. However, the learned Single Judge set aside this decision, reinstating the Respondent and awarding compensation. This was challenged in a writ appeal.

The Division Bench of the High Court found that the Respondent’s name had been listed as a permanent employee only to obtain university recognition for a course. It ruled that this did not confer permanent employment status. Since there was no formal confirmation of employment beyond the contractual period, the court held that the termination was valid. The order of the learned Single Judge was set aside, and the writ petition was dismissed.

The Key Points Are:

No Formal Confirmation – For Lobo to be considered permanent, there needed to be an official appointment order and confirmation of his services.

This case highlights the legal importance of formal employment status and the necessity of proper documentation in employment-related disputes.

You Should also Read these Blogs: Suspension Pending Enquiry

Sexual Harassment Excluded from Unfair Labour Practices under Industrial Disputes Act, 1947