HC seeks reply from VS secretariat in petition filed by terminated employees
Sunday, 26 February 2023 | PNS | NAINITAL
Admitting an amendment application filed by the ad hoc employees terminated from their jobs in the Vidhan Sabha, the Uttarakhand High Court single bench of justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari has sought an additional response from the Vidhan Sabha secretariat within two weeks. The matter will be taken up for hearing next on March 31.
On Saturday, the terminated employees challenged the Vidhan Sabha probe report through the amendment application in the court. The petitioners have contended that the appointments made to posts in the Vidhan Sabha from 2001 to 2015 were also invalid but only the appointments made from 2016 to 2021 were probed and found to be invalid following which the persons occupying the posts were terminated. The petitioners further stated that they were not given an opportunity to be heard after the probe and that they faced discrimination which is against the principle of natural justice.
According to the case details, the terminated ad hoc employees including Babita Bhandari, Bhupendra Singh Bisht, Kuldeep Singh and 102 others have challenged the termination orders in the single bench. They have stated that the Vidhan Sabha speaker terminated them from their jobs citing public interest on September 27, 28 and 29, 2022. The termination orders do not mention the basis and the reason for their termination from service and they were not given an opportunity to be heard though they were working like regularised employees in the Vidhan Sabha secretariat. Stating that terminating such a number of employees together is not in public interest, they have contended that the termination orders are against the rules. The petitioners have added that backdoor appointments were made to 396 posts in the Vidhan Sabha secretary between 2001 and 2015 but the persons on these posts were regularised. The petition states that persons appointed on ad hoc basis till 2014 were regularised after serving for less than four years but the petitioners were not regularised even after serving for six years after which their services were terminated.
