TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the termination of a temporary government servant under Rule 5(1) of the Central Civil Services (Temporary Services) Rules, 1965 was vitiated as a stigmatic order because it mentioned that the employee was under suspension. (ii) Whether acquittal in the criminal case entitled the employee to reinstatement and made the termination illegal.
Issue (i): Whether the termination of a temporary government servant under Rule 5(1) of the Central Civil Services (Temporary Services) Rules, 1965 was vitiated as a stigmatic order because it mentioned that the employee was under suspension.
Analysis: The order was passed in exercise of the power of termination of a temporary employee and merely recorded the fact that he was under suspension at the time. Such a reference did not amount to a finding of misconduct or attach a stigma to the order. The termination was therefore treated as a termination simpliciter and not as a punitive order requiring a disciplinary enquiry.
Conclusion: The termination order was not stigmatic and was validly made under the temporary service .
Issue (ii): Whether acquittal in the criminal case entitled the employee to reinstatement and made the termination illegal.
Analysis: Acquittal in a criminal case does not automatically confer a right to reinstatement. It remains open to the competent authority to decide whether reinstatement is appropriate or whether action under the service rules should be taken. In the case of a temporary government servant accused of misappropriation of public money, the authority could lawfully invoke the temporary service rules instead of continuing the employee in service or conducting a full enquiry first.
Conclusion: Acquittal did not entitle the employee to reinstatement, and the termination was not illegal on that ground.
Final Conclusion: The appellate court's view on stigma and compensation was rejected, and the original dismissal of the writ petition was restored.
Ratio Decidendi: A temporary government servant's termination is valid as a termination simpliciter when the order merely notes suspension without imputing misconduct, and criminal acquittal does not by itself require reinstatement or invalidate action taken under the temporary service rules.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
