Back
C. A. VAIDIALINGAM, R. S. BACHAWAT, K. N. WANCHOO, G. K. MITTER, J. M. SHELAT
State Of Punjab – Appellant
Versus
Dharam Singh, Des Raj – Respondent
Key Points: - The Court held that if the probation period is fixed with a maximum (e.g., three years) and the employee is allowed to continue beyond the expiry without a formal confirmation order, such continuation cannot by itself imply confirmation if the rule forbids extending beyond the maximum period; however, the implication may arise that the employee is confirmed when the maximum period ends and there is no extension order. (!) - The respondents, officiating in permanent posts under Rule 6(1), were treated as probationers; the High Court found they were deemed confirmed after three years (Oct 1, 1960), and the impugned removal orders violated Article 311 and Punjab Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1952; the Supreme Court sustained this view that their removal without proper procedure was invalid. (!) (!) - There must be an express order of confirmation to grant substantive rights to a post when probation ends; mere continuation beyond the probation period without such an order is not automatically confirmation. (!) - Where the maximum probation period has expired and the authority has continued employment without a written confirmation, it may be deemed that confirmation by implication occurred, but the rule’s proviso restricting extensions affects this inference. (!) - The impugned orders terminating services without following the disciplinary procedure and without Article 311 compliance were set aside; the matter emphasizes adherence to constitutional and civil service procedures for removals. (!)
Judgement
BACHAWAT, J. : These two connected appeals raise a common question of construction of Rule 6 of the Punjab Educational Service (Provincialised Cadre) Class III Rules, 1961. Before October 1, 1957, Dharam Singh and Dev Raj, the respondents to these appeals, were junior teachers in District Board Schools. The District Board schools were provincialised, and the services of the respondents were taken over by the Punjab State with effect from October 1, 1957 in pursuance of a scheme of provincialisation of Local Bodies schools in the State. On February 13, 1961, the Governor of Punjab in exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution framed the Punjab Educational Service (Provincialised Cadre) Class III Rules, 1961 regulating the conditions of service of the teaching staff taken over by the State Government from the local authorities. Rule 1 provides that the rules will be deemed to have come into force with effect from October 1, 1957. Rule 3 created the Punjab Educational (Provincialised Cadre) Class III Services consisting of the posts shown in Appendix A. It is common case that the posts held by the respondents are included in Appendix A
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
