NEW DELHI: The Jharkhand high court has ordered a peon’s reinstatement after he was sacked for allegedly taking home tea powder and biscuits from his office. The court called his dismissal “grossly disproportionate” and said it is too harsh to accept.What was the dispute aboutRanjeet Kumar Himanshu had worked as a contractual peon with the District Rural Development Agency (DRDA) in Bokaro since December 2005. In March 2022, after nearly 17 years of service, the Deputy Development Commissioner issued him a show-cause notice accusing him of taking “some material” home from the office without permission, adding that some of it had since been returned. The notice never specified what the material actually was.Himanshu’s lawyer told the court the material in question was only tea powder and biscuits.In his written reply, Himanshu said he supported a family of six — his wife, three daughters and a younger sister — on his modest pay, and that losing his job would leave them on the street. He asked for forgiveness and promised any mistake would not be repeated.Despite this, the Deputy Development Commissioner terminated his service on 2 May 2022, in an order that simply said his explanation was “not satisfactory,” without giving any reasons.A single judge of the high court had earlier dismissed his challenge to this termination, in January 2026, after which he filed this appeal.What the court saidA division bench comprising Chief Justice M.S. Sonak and Justice Rajesh Shankar held that a notice which never says what exactly the person did wrong amounts to no notice at all — and since Himanshu’s notice never specified what the “material” was, it fell into this category.“The issue of a vague show-cause notice amounts to no notice. Therefore, based upon a vague show-cause notice, the respondents cannot claim that the principles of natural justice were duly complied with,” the court held.The bench also found that the termination order gave no reasons and did not even consider Himanshu’s response. It went on to note that the show-cause notice never alleged this was a repeated habit, so it had to be treated as a one-off incident.“Even if we assume that the appellant had taken home some tea and biscuits from the office [which we do not justify or approve], we still think that imposing the penalty of dismissal upon the appellant, a lowly paid peon working on a contractual basis for the last 17 years, is grossly disproportionate and shocks the conscience,” the court said.“This is certainly not justice tempered with mercy, but injustice brimming with insensitivity,” the bench observed.Setting aside the termination order, the court directed that Himanshu be reinstated by 1 July 2026, along with 50 percent of the back wages for the nearly four years he remained out of service, to be paid by 31 July 2026. He forfeits the remaining 50 percent, which the court said was itself “more than sufficient penalty” for any lapse on his part.The Deputy Commissioner and Deputy Development Commissioner, Bokaro, were directed to personally ensure compliance and file status reports with the court by 10 July and 10 August 2026.
