No Compassion For Govt Employee Who Has No Will To Work: HC
“No compassion can be shown to a person who has no will to work and no respect for the directions/warnings issued by authorities,” Justice V P Vaish said. |
New Delhi: No compassion can be shown to a person who neither has the
will to work, nor respect for the directions given by authorities, the
Delhi High Court has observed while dismissing the plea of a temporary
government employee against termination of her service.
The court noted that sufficient opportunity was given to the woman
petitioner who appeared to be absenting from work at her “own whims and
fancies” without bothering for the consequences.
“Further, no compassion can be shown to a person who has no will to work
and no respect for the directions/warnings issued by authorities. It is
absolutely clear that sufficient opportunity was given to the
petitioner (woman) but she showed no improvement,” Justice V P Vaish
said.
The court’s order came on a petition filed by the woman, appointed as a
lower division clerk on temporary basis in a district court here in
September 1992. Her service was terminated in 2002 under the Central
Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965.
She had approached the high court against the termination claiming that
neither was any opportunity of show cause was given to her, nor any
reasons for termination conveyed.
Counsel appearing for the office of District and Sessions Judge, the
incharge of district court, opposed her plea saying the termination
order was legal and valid, as she was a temporary employee and her
service was not yet confirmed.
The lawyer also claimed that she was not performing her duties with due
diligence as she had regularly absented, even when her leave
applications were rejected.
While dismissing the petition, the court referred to the provision of
Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965 under which her
service was terminated and observed that it “postulates that no enquiry
is to be held prior to passing of termination order in case a temporary
government servant is not found suitable for the job.”
“It is pertinent to mention here that even after issuance of repeated
memos, the petitioner neither reported back to duty nor submitted any
satisfactory explanation for her absence which shows that she was
absolutely incorrigible and did not mend her ways despite repeated
warnings,” it said.
“In these circumstances, any employer would have taken the same action
because it was absolutely clear that the petitioner was not interested
in her job. If the petitioner has been terminated, she is to blame
herself,” it said.
No comments:
Post a Comment