The Himachal Pradesh High Court has dismissed a petition against the state government’s decision to terminate all extensions or re-employments accorded by the previous government.

A Division Bench comprising Justices Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Virender Singh, passed this order, on the petition filed by Om Prakash Sharma with regard to termination of all extensions or re-employments accorded by the previous government, with immediate effect.

The petitioner had challenged the state government’s notification dated 12 December, whereby all extensions or re-employments accorded and operative were ordered to be terminated forthwith except for the government medical colleges.

Sharma in his petition stated that he retired from the post of Tehsildar on 31 March, 2021 and as the post of Tehsildar (Bank Recovery) was lying vacant with the Himachal Pradesh State Co-operative Bank, he joined the said post on April 13, 2022 after approval of the Board of Directors.

The previous government had formulated a policy for re-engaging retired employees for a further period of one year on contractual basis so that the experience of such employees could be utilized meaningfully.

However, in view of the recent change of guard, as a fall out and direct outcome of this notification his services was terminated and aggrieved by the action of state government, he filed the instant petition with prayer to quash and set aside the aforesaid order of the state government, maintained the petitioner.

The counsel for petitioner vehemently argued that the services of the petitioner could not have been terminated without following basic principles of natural justice and fair play and the action of the respondents is in violation of the provisions of Constitution of India, more particularly, Articles 14 and 16 thereof.

After hearing the counsel for the petitioner at length and going through the record of the case, the High Court found that nothing prevents the respondents from reviewing their policy. The High Court observed that it is more than settled that the policy can be reviewed by the competent authority from time to time.

The High Court, finding justifiable reason to withdraw the earlier decision to grant re-employment, observed that it is in the larger public interest that the services of the re-employed needs to be dispensed with as the retired employees per se do not have any right of re-employment.