ups_00574 — When allegations of misconduct lead to stigmatic dismissal, it cannot be treated as termination simpliciter. Requires observance of natural justice. Policy decisions must be applied uniformly to all Circles

When allegations of misconduct lead to stigmatic dismissal, it cannot be treated as termination simpliciter. Requires observance of natural justice. Policy decisions must be applied uniformly to all Circles — This chunk discusses a case where the Applicants, who were appointed as Postal Assistants/Sorting Assistants under the Respondents, had their services terminated based on allegations of misconduct. T... — Facts: Pursuant to the advertisement issued by the Respondents, the Applicants participated in the selection process for the post of Postal Assistant / Sorting Assistant. On the Applicants being declared successful in such selection process, they were appointed to such posts in various circles, including Punjab and Gujarat, etc. under Respondent No. 1. The Applicants, after completing their training, were posted under the Respondents. The Learned Counsel for the Respondents submitted that, unlike in O.A. No. 1992 of 2025, where the appointment was cancelled before joining due to an adverse CFSL report about signature mismatch, in the other OAs, the Applicants' services were terminated under Rule 5 (1) of the CCS (Temporary) Service Rules, 1965, after their appointment. Aggrieved, the Applicants challenged these termination and cancellation orders. The learned Counsel for the Applicants argued that the issue is no longer res integra, as a Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in Sanjeev Kumar and another v. Director-General of Postal Services [ O.A. No. 2756 of 2019 and batch) allowed similar cases. The Delhi High Court upheld this decision on 18-7-2024 (W.P. (C) No. 15248 of 2022) and the Supreme Court dismissed the SLP (C) Diary No. 55214 of 2024 filed by the Union of India on 16-12-2024. Further, a policy decision, dated 17-4-2025, issued after consultation with the Department of Legal Affairs, directed reinstatement of all similarly placed candidates whose termination was based solely on negative CFSL reports and applying the principle of “No Work No Pay.” The Applicants contend that, despite these judicial pronouncements and policy directions, the Respondents have failed to reinstate them, which is arbitrary and unjust. The learned Counsel for the Respondents informed that despite efforts, no definite instructions had been received. He further explained that the communication, dated 17-4-2025 was circulated to the Chief Postmaster-Generals of certain circles - namely Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Haryana, Rajasthan, and Uttarakhand - but not to the Punjab Circle. Since the Applicants in O.A. No. 1992 of 2025 and related cases belong to the Punjab Circle, the concerned authority there has taken up the matter with Respondent No. 1, to enable them to take a final decision.