J.S. Arora vs D.V.C.

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

DELHI HIGH COURT
YASHWANT VARMA
J.S. Arora – Appellant
Versus
D.V.C. – Respondent

Table of Content
1. termination of employment during probation. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. committee report validates termination decision. (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
3. lack of written warnings does not invalidate termination. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
4. legal precedents support assessment of probationers. (Para 12 , 13)
5. procedural compliance in employment terminations. (Para 14 , 15)
6. continuous monitoring of employee performance necessary. (Para 16)
7. judicial review limited to fairness of evaluation. (Para 39 , 40 , 41 , 47)

JUDGMENT

Yashwant Varma, J. The petitioner challenges the orders of 30 January 2004, 03 June 2004 and 04 April 2006. By the first order of 30 January 2004, the engagement of the petitioner as Director (HRD) in the Damodar Valley Corporation [Corporation] on probation came to be terminated with immediate effect. By the order of 03 June 2004, the Bokaro Power Supply Company Private Limited [BPSCL] is stated to have offered the position of Head of Personnel and Administration to the petitioner. BPSCL is a joint venture entity formed by SAIL and the Corporation. Assailing the order of termination, the petitioner came to prefer W.P.(C) 20141/2005 before this Court. That petition

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

DELHI HIGH COURTYASHWANT VARMAJ.S. Arora – AppellantVersusD.V.C. – Respondent

DELHI HIGH COURT
YASHWANT VARMA
J.S. Arora – Appellant
Versus
D.V.C. – Respondent