The termination of a probationary employee must be based on reasons related to suitability for the job, and a termination order may not be considered stigmatic even if it refers to unsatisfactory service.

Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.

Oral:

CM No. 6147/2012

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

WP(C) 2843/2012

1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 23.03.2012 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in O.A No. 760/2011. The petitioner had filed the said original application challenging the termination letter dated 16.09.2010 which was a termination of his services simpliciter in terms of paragraph 5 of his appointment letter dated 27.07.2009.

2. The petitioner was offered appointment to the post of Trained Graduate Teacher (TGT) Social Science by virtue of the said appointment letter dated 27.07.2009. One of the conditions stipulated in the said appointment letter was set out in paragraph 5 thereof which reads as under:-

“5. During the probation and thereafter, until he/she is confirmed, the services of the appointee are terminable by one month notice on either side without any reason being assigned, therefore. The appointing authority, however, reserves the rights to terminate the services of the appointee before expiry of the stipulated period of notice by making payment of such amount equivalent to the pay & allowances for the period of notice of the unexpired portion thereof.”

Pursuant to the said condition, the petitioner’s services were terminated by the order dated 16.09.2010 which is in the following terms:-

“ORDER

In pursuance of para 5 offer of appointment made to his vide Memorandum No. F.16-2/2009-KVS (BPL)/4096 dated 27/07/2009 the service of Shri Dharmendra Kumar, TGT (Social Studies), Kendriya Vidyalaya, Karera are hereby terminated with immediate effect by making payment of one month pay and allowances in lieu of notice period.”

It is apparent that the termination was a termination simpliciter.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the actual reasons behind the termination were his absence from the school for nearly three months. According to the petitioner this was the result of his ailment and he had medical certificates for the same. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent doubted the authenticity & veracity of the medical certificates and therefore the same ought to have been verified and the petitioner ought to have been given a chance to establish that the medical certificates were genuine. He submitted that the termination letter was bad in law as it had been issued without giving the petitioner any opportunity or chance to substantiate his claim that he could not attend the duty in the school on account of medical reasons.

4. We find that the Tribunal has examined the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner at length and has even reproduced the letter dated 15.07.2010 issued to the petitioner directing him to be present in school and to complete the syllabus of the subjects he was teaching . The said letter dated 15.07.2010 clearly indicates that the petitioner had taken leave to go for the medical examination for the post of Assistant Commandant with the Central Reserve Police Force. This leave was taken on 29.06.2010 till 01.07.2010. Even though the leave ended on 01.07.2010, the petitioner remained absent from school till 15.07.2010, that is, the date on which the letter was written. The letter also indicates that the petitioner remained absent from school earlier also from 15.04.2010 to 25.04.2010. By the letter dated 03.07.2010 the petitioner had been informed that his leave would not be extended and he should be present himself in school so that the students do not suffer. However, no response had been received to that letter dated 03.07.2010. Thereafter, a medical certificate had been sent by the petitioner which was received in the office of the respondent on 08.07.2010 but this was not accompanied by any application for extension of leave or for seeking leave and there was no indication as to how long the petitioner would remain absent. As such no leave was sanctioned. It was als