Illegal Termination of Contractual Employees: Allahabad High Court Sets Aside Termination of UPSRTC Bus Conductor
- Utkarsh Shubham
- Feb 9
- 4 min read
👉Can a contractual employee be terminated overnight, without an enquiry and without being heard, merely on the basis of an spot inspection report? In a significant and employee‑protective ruling, the Allahabad High Court has once again reaffirmed that even contractual employees are entitled to the protection of principles of natural justice. In Gajendra Singh v. State of U.P. & Others (Writ‑A No. 13204 of 2019), the Court set aside the termination order of a UPSRTC Bus Conductor, holding that a stigmatic termination without enquiry or opportunity of hearing is illegal.
This case was argued and successfully concluded by Adv. Utkarsh Shubham and Adv. Devesh Saxena at S&D Legal Associates, where the writ petition was originally filed in 2019 and culminated in a favourable verdict in 2026.
This article reviews the judgment, examines the broader issue of illegal termination of contractual employees, and explains why this decision has far‑reaching implications for public sector employers and contractual staff alike.
Illegal Termination of Contractual Employees: A Recurring Problem
Across government departments and public sector undertakings, contractual employees are frequently terminated:
Without issuing a charge‑sheet.
Without conducting a departmental enquiry.
Without granting any opportunity of hearing.
Solely on the basis of inspection reports or internal notes.
The misconception often is that contractual employment equals no legal protection. Indian constitutional jurisprudence, however, has consistently rejected this notion.
Where the termination order:
Casts a stigma,
Records allegations of misconduct, or
Has civil consequences,
the employer is bound to follow principles of natural justice, irrespective of the contractual nature of employment.
Brief Facts of the Case
The petitioner was appointed in 2005 as a contractual Bus Conductor with the Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (UPSRTC) and had an unblemished service record.
The Inspection Incident
On 16.12.2011, the petitioner was on duty on a UPSRTC Bus.
During a spot inspection, five passengers were alleged to be travelling without tickets.
The petitioner contended that he was in the process of issuing tickets when the inspection team intervened.
Termination Without Enquiry
On 24.12.2011, solely on the basis of the inspection report, the petitioner’s services were terminated.
No charge‑sheet was issued.
No enquiry was conducted.
No opportunity of hearing was granted.
Mechanical Rejection of Reinstatement
The petitioner sought reinstatement along with other similarly placed conductors.
By an order dated 28.10.2015, three employees were reinstated, but the petitioner was rejected through a one‑line, non‑speaking order, without assigning any reasons.
Aggrieved, the petitioner approached the Allahabad High Court by filing a writ petition seeking the quashing of his illegal termination order.
Core Legal Issue Before the Court
The main question to be decided by the Hon'ble Allahabad Court was:
Whether a contractual employee can be terminated on allegations of misconduct without holding an enquiry and without affording an opportunity of hearing?
Findings of the Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court answered the issue decisively in favour of the Petitioner after making following key findings:
1. Stigmatic Termination Requires Enquiry
The Court held that although the petitioner was a contractual employee, the termination order was stigmatic in nature, as it was founded on allegations of misconduct.
Once stigma is attached, the employer cannot bypass disciplinary procedure.
2. Violation of Principles of Natural Justice
It was an admitted position that:
No departmental enquiry was held.
No opportunity of hearing was provided.
The Court observed that such action is arbitrary, illegal, and unsustainable in law.
3. Mechanical and Non‑Speaking Orders Are Impermissible
The Court also disapproved the order dated 28.10.2015, which rejected the petitioner’s reinstatement without recording any reasons.
Administrative authorities are duty‑bound to pass reasoned and speaking orders, especially when the decision affects livelihood.
Reliance on Earlier Judgments
The High Court relied upon and reiterated principles laid down in:
🔹 Arvind Singh v. U.P. State Road Transport Corporation & Ors.[1]
This judgment clarified that contractual employees cannot be removed on allegations of misconduct without due process, and that stigma attracts constitutional safeguards.
🔹 U.P. State Road Transport Corporation v. Brijesh Kumar and Anr.[2]
The Supreme Court reaffirmed that termination orders founded on misconduct allegations require a fair enquiry, regardless of employment status.
The present case aligns squarely with these precedents, strengthening the jurisprudence against illegal termination of contractual employees.
Final Directions of the Court
Acordingly, The Hon'ble Allahabad High Court was pleased to:
Set aside the termination order dated 24.12.2011.
Quashed the rejection order dated 28.10.2015.
Granted liberty to the Corporation to hold a fresh enquiry in accordance with law within two months.
Directed that if no enquiry is initiated within the stipulated time, the petitioner shall be reinstated without back wages.
The writ petition was thus allowed.
Why This Judgment Matters
This ruling is a strong reminder that:
Contractual employment does not mean absolute vulnerability.
Allegations of misconduct cannot be punished summarily.
Public employers must act fairly, transparently and lawfully.
For thousands of contractual employees working with government bodies, this judgment offers judicial reassurance against arbitrary termination.
Key Takeaways on Illegal Termination of Contractual Employees
❌ No enquiry = Illegal termination.
❌ No hearing = Violation of natural justice.
❌ Stigmatic termination without due process = Unsustainable in law.
✅ Even contractual employees enjoy constitutional protection.
How S&D Legal Associates Can Help
At S&D Legal Associates, we regularly represent employees and employers before the Allahabad High Court and other forums in matters involving:
Illegal termination of contractual employees.
Service law disputes.
Disciplinary proceedings.
Writ petitions under Article 226.
If you or your organisation is facing issues relating to termination, suspension or disciplinary action, timely legal intervention can make all the difference.
Need Legal Assistance?
If you believe your termination is arbitrary, stigmatic or violative of natural justice, do not accept it as final.
👉 Reach out to S&D Legal Associates for a detailed legal consultation and strategic representation.
Justice delayed may still be justice delivered — provided you take the right legal steps.
[1] Writ-A No. 14886 of 2022.
[2] 2024 INSC 638.
Read Order:
Comments