ORDER

Leave granted

We have heard learned counsel on both sides.

2. This appeal arises out of the order of the Delhi High Court in Writ Petition No. 3695 of 1990 made on April 30, 1991. The Appellant was appointed initially on ad hoc basis on March 3, 1987 and thereafter with a view to regularise his services, he was put on probation. During probation, his servicies having been found to be not satisfactory, were terminated by proceedings dated December 1, 1989. The appellant came to challenge the same by filing writ petition in November 1990 which was dismissed by the High Court. Thus this appeal by special leave.

3. It is contended by the appellant that since the averments made in the counter would constitute foundation for dismissal for misconduct, an enquiry in this behalf was required to be made. On the other hand, it is contended by the respondent that during the probation the apellant did not acquire any right to the post. If on being found suitable he was regularised, only then he would have acquired the right to continue in the post. During probation, it was found that his services were not satisfactory and reasons were given in support thereof. Thus they do not constitu