The Court Upholds the Principle of Natural Justice, Emphasizes the Validity of Minor's Contracts Benefiting the Minor
In a significant ruling, the Orissa High Court has directed the reinstatement of Kalpana Nayak, who was removed from her position after it was discovered that she was a minor at the time of her appointment. The Division Bench, comprising Justices Dixit Krishna Shripad and Chittaranjan Dash, held that the removal was unsustainable as it violated the principles of natural justice, given that Nayak had attained the age of majority by the time of her dismissal and had been performing her duties satisfactorily.
The case was brought to the court by the Union of India, challenging an earlier order from the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) which had favored Nayak's reinstatement. The Union argued that Nayak's appointment at the age of 17 years and 9 months was invalid as the minimum prescribed age was 18 years. However, the court found that the removal process did not afford Nayak an opportunity for a hearing, thereby breaching the principles of natural justice.
The court also invoked the doctrine of 'indoor management' and noted that all necessary documents, including a valid Matriculation Certificate, were provided at the time of her application. The court emphasized that there was no culpability on Nayak's part, as she had not misrepresented her age.
Moreover, the court examined the applicability of the legal principle that a contract entered into by a minor is not void if it benefits the minor. It cited the case of Mohori Bibee v. Dharmodas Ghose, asserting that the contract was valid since it was beneficial to Nayak and she had discharged her duties satisfactorily post attaining majority.
The court's decision also considered the socio-economic context, highlighting the importance of such employment opportunities for individuals in rural areas where poverty is prevalent. The judgment concluded with the court's directive to reinstate Nayak within six weeks, failing which the Union risks contempt proceedings.
Bottom Line:
Employment law - Removal of employee from service without proper opportunity of hearing and in violation of principles of natural justice is unsustainable.
Statutory provision(s): Principles of Natural Justice, Doctrine of Indoor Management, Maxim "factum valet quod fieri dabuit", Mohori Bibee v. Dharmodas Ghose, Union of India v. C. Rama Swamy, Union of India v. Tulsiram Patel
Union of India v. Kalpana Nayak, (Orissa)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2839137
