MADURAI: The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, while directing the reinstatement of a jeep driver who was removed from his post as he was wrongly appointed, has observed that the government, being the model employer, cannot adopt atrocious practices such as cancelling a person’s appointment after 14 years of service due to its fault in recruitment.
One R Sasikumar joined as a jeep driver through an employment exchange at Krishnarajapuram panchayat union office in Karur district on May 11, 2010. The panchayat union commissioner cancelled his appointment on May 31, 2024, stating that he was wrongly appointed to a post that was reserved for a scheduled caste person (Arunthathiyar on a preferential basis).
The government pleader stated that Sasikumar’s appointment was temporary, and is against the government order issued about a rotation-based appointment system.
Justice RN Manjula said if the vacancy is not regular, then there is no necessity to follow a community-based reservation approach. The petitioner has not suppressed any material facts while obtaining the job, and the error lies on the part of the appointing authority which failed to follow the guidelines of the rotation-based appointment system. The government cannot adopt such atrocious practices of cancelling the appointment of a person after 14 long years, and the petitioner cannot be penalised or be made a scapegoat, the judge observed.
The court said the government has a vicarious liability to compensate the loss caused due to mistakes committed by its employees. Instead of bearing such liability, it would be ideal if the government continues to engage the petitioner’s services. The petitioner has not stated wishes to seek compensation instead of being reinstated, and it is reiterated that the petitioner’s services have been terminated for no fault of his, the court stated.
“The state government, including the Commissioner of Rural Development and Panchayat Raj, must ensure that the petitioner gets all benefits until reinstatement. If the government feels that the post in contention will not be available for the category under which the post ought to be filled, an order in the form of either ratification or creating a super-numerical post can be done by considering this as a special case,” the court stated.
