Rohit was a regular conductor working with the State Road Transport Corporation (SRTC). He died on 18th October 2013 while in service. Krishna, son of Rohit was a minor at that time. On attaining the age of majority i.e.

As provided in the case, in connection with the application for compassionate appointment, SRTC decided to appoint Krishna on preferential basis as a contract conductor. He was also requested to deposit a security amount of ₹10,000/-. On deposit of the requisite security deposit, Krishna entered into an agreement with the SRTC on 12th December 2020 to function as a contract conductor. From the above, it is clear that Krishna was not appointed on compassionate basis. He was appointed as a contract conductor on preferential basis, being the son of the deceased employee. In a similar case, U.P. State Road Transport Corporation vs Brijesh Kumar, decided on 28th August, 2024 , where the services of the contract employee were determined solely on the ground of misconduct as alleged but without holding any regular inquiry or affording any opportunity of hearing to him, the Court held that the order of termination of his services, even if on contractual basis, has been passed on account of alleged misconduct without following the Principles of Natural Justice is bad in law. As such, termination of the services of Krishna without holding any disciplinary enquiry or giving him an opportunity to present his case is against the Principles of Natural Justice and cannot be sustained.