#contractual termination

The Allahabad High Court has ruled that terminating contractual employees under Government Order 25.07.2021 without providing any reasoning for rejecting their submissions renders the accompanying employment disability clause unenforceable. This upholds the principle that even contractual appointments are shielded by natural justice, requiring speaking orders before imposing career-long restrictions.

The Bombay High Court reaffirms that courts must not re-evaluate evidence or substitute their own findings in arbitration appeals unless the tribunal’s reasoning is perverse, illegal, or violates natural justice. This reinforces the finality of arbitral awards and protects party autonomy in commercial disputes, signaling that judicial intervention is limited to procedural or jurisdictional flaws - not substantive disagreements.

CAT Allahabad holds that contractual termination carrying stigmatic implications violates principles of natural justice, even if the contract permits termination without cause. The ruling mandates an opportunity for the employee to respond before adverse action, reinforcing procedural fairness in employment disputes under service law.

The Delhi High Court ruled that NHAI’s termination of a toll contract before expiry under Clause 35(6) is valid if it safeguards the public exchequer, even absent contractor breach. The ruling clarifies that contractual termination clauses in public infrastructure projects override commercial expectations, but only when justified by fiscal necessity-not speculative profit.

The Calcutta High Court ruled that promissory estoppel prevents the government from terminating existing leases without valid justification, even amid policy shifts like the transition from ICF to LHB rakes. The judgment reinforces that public authorities cannot disregard legitimate expectations of private parties in contractual agreements, setting a precedent for fairness in government contracts.