Service regulation breach makes dismissal wrongful, but does not by itself justify reinstatement or continuance in service.

Breach of Regulation 16(3) in the disciplinary enquiry vitiated the procedure, but the employee had no statutory status under the corporation's service regulations. The Court distinguished a void dismissal for breach of a mandatory statutory obligation from a wrongful dismissal in a master-and-servant relationship. On that basis, violation of the service regulation made the dismissal wrongful only, and the proper remedy lay in damages rather than a declaration of continuance in service or reinstatement with full pay and emoluments. Relief seeking reinstatement and back pay was therefore denied.

---

---

Issues: Whether breach of Regulation 16(3) of the Uttar Pradesh State Warehousing Corporation Regulations, 1961 in conducting the disciplinary enquiry rendered the dismissal null and void so as to entitle the employee to a declaration of continuance in service with full pay and emoluments.

Analysis: The dismissal was found to be in breach of the procedural safeguards contained in Regulation 16(3), and the enquiry was treated as vitiated. However, the Corporation was held to be acting under regulations made under the enabling Act, and those regulations governed the terms and conditions of service but did not confer a statutory status on the employee. A distinction was drawn between cases where dismissal is void because a mandatory statutory obligation is breached and cases where a service rule is violated in a master-and-servant relationship. In the latter category, the normal consequence is that the dismissal is wrongful and the remedy lies in damages, not in a decree of reinstatement or continuance in service.

Conclusion: The violation of Regulation 16(3) did not justify a declaration that the dismissal was void or that the employee continued in service. The relief of reinstatement with full pay and emoluments was not sustainable and was denied.

Ratio Decidendi: Breach of service regulations framed by a corporation under enabling statutory power, without conferring statutory status on the employee, makes the dismissal wrongful but does not by itself entitle the employee to declaratory relief of reinstatement or continuance in service.

---