Allahabad HC sets aside dismissal on ground of live-in relationship

The order of dismissal was passed against the petitioner, Gore Lal Verma, solely on the ground that despite being married to one Laxmi Devi, who is alive, the petitioner maintained an extra-marital relationship with another lady named Hemlata Verma and both are staying together as husband and wife. He also has three children from the live-in relationship.

The Allahabad high court has set aside the dismissal order of a government employee who was removed from service for being in a live-in relationship with another woman.

The man is married and his wife is alive.

Advertisement

Justice Pankaj Bhatia, while passing the order, made it clear to the state authorities to pass a fresh order imposing minor penalties.

ALSO READ | 'Sorry, Will Not Interfere': SC Rejects Maha Plea To Cap Non-Covid Costs

Advertisement

The order of dismissal was passed against the petitioner, Gore Lal Verma, solely on the ground that despite being married to one Laxmi Devi, who is alive, the petitioner maintained an extra-marital relationship with another lady named Hemlata Verma and both are staying together as husband and wife. He also has three children from the live-in relationship.

The authorities had recorded that the said conduct is against the provisions of the UP Government Servant Conduct Rules, 1956, and against the provisions of Hindu Marriage Act. As such, the order of dismissal from service was passed.

Advertisement

It was argued on behalf of the petitioner that in a similar matter in case of one Aneeta Yadav, this court, after considering, set aside the dismissal order.

However, an opportunity was granted to the respondents to award any minor penalty, if they so desire.

Advertisement

It was further argued that the said judgment was challenged in special leave to appeal and the Supreme Court refused to interfere. Consequently, the said special leave to appeal was dismissed.

ALSO READ | Not a single shred of evidence to link govt, party to Pegasus report: BJP

Advertisement

After hearing the counsel, the court set aside his order of dismissal observing that considering the fact as well as the judgment of this court in the case of Aneeta Yadav, the petitioner is also entitled to the same benefit.

Consequently, the writ petition was allowed and the respondent authority was directed to reinstate the petitioner.

Advertisement

However, the court directed that the petitioner shall not be paid back wages from the date of dismissal till date.
 

Advertisement