SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1980 Supreme(Mad) 129

1980 I LLJ 414 Mad
S. Mohan
K. Palanikumar
Versus
Indian Bank And Anr.
Decided on: 6/3/1980
.

An employer is entitled to terminate the services of a probationary employee without assigning any reason, provided that the termination is not discriminatory.

Headnote:

TERMINATION OF PROBATION - BANK EMPLOYEE - SUPPRESSION OF INFORMATION - REASONABLENESS OF REQUIREMENT - CONFIDENCE OF EMPLOYER - DISCRIMINATION - SASTRY AWARD - INTERPRETATION - [INDIAN BANK V. K. RAJAGOPALAN]

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a Scheduled Caste candidate, applied for a clerk/shroff position at the Indian Bank. In the application form, he was required to provide information about relatives working in the Bank. The petitioner left the column blank as he thought it only applied to parents. He was provisionally selected and joined the Bank. However, before the completion of his six-month probation period, his services were terminated on the ground that he had suppressed the fact that his step-brother was employed in the Bank's Bombay Fort Branch. The petitioner challenged the termination order, arguing that the requirement to disclose information about relatives was unreasonable and that the termination was discriminatory.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the requirement to disclose information about relatives was reasonable and that the Bank was entitled to terminate the petitioner's services during the probation period without assigning any reason. The Court also found that there was no discrimination as the Bank had taken action against other employees who had failed to disclose information about their relatives.

Issues: 1. Whether the requirement to disclose information about relatives in the application form was reasonable? 2. Whether the Bank was entitled to terminate the petitioner's services during the probation period without assigning any reason? 3. Whether there was discrimination in the Bank's action?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the requirement to disclose information about relatives was reasonable as it was necessary for the Bank to maintain confidence and trust among its employees. 2. The Court held that the Bank was entitled to terminate the petitioner's services during the probation period without assigning any reason as per the terms of the appointment order and the Sastry Award. 3. The Court held that there was no discrimination as the Bank had taken action against other employees who had failed to disclose information about their relatives.

Final Decision: The Court dismissed the writ petition.

ORDER

1. The facts leading to the writ petition are as follows : The petitioner passed B. Com, examination in the year 1977 held by the Madras University. He belongs to the Scheduled caste. An advertisement appeared sometime in December, 1977 in the Hindu calling for applications from candidates for appointment as clerk/shroff under the first respondent-Indian Bank. The petitioner filed his application. It requires to be stated at this stage that the advertisement indicated the nature of particulars which the candidate was required to furnish. Under column (h) the candidate was required to furnish the names of relatives, if any, working in Indian Bank and the nature of relationship together with the name of the Branch where they work. Admittedly the petitioner's step-brother was working in the Bank in its Bombay Fort Branch. Thinking that this column related only to parents and, therefore, he need not give the particulars required in his application dated 21-1-1978 that column was left blank. On 1-8-1978 the petitioner was directed to be present for an interview at the Staff Training College, 'Leelavathi Mansion, II Floor No. 69, Armenian street, Madras-1. The petitioner did take the interview. Thereafter by an order dated 15th November, 1978, the petitioner was provisionally selected for appointment as a clerk in the service of the Bank subject to be being medically found fit for the job on the following terms and conditions :

"1. Your starting salary will be Rs. 190 p.m. with such Dearness Allowance as may be sanctioned from time to time (the present D.A. being Rs. 319.20) and proportionate local allowance of Rs. 48 p.m. during the period of training only.

2. You will be bound by the rules and regulations of the Bank from time to time.

3. You will be on probation with salary for a period of six months from the date of joining. Notwithstanding anything contained in this letter, your service are liable to be terminated at the sole discretion of the Bank even before the expiry of the probationary period without assigning any reason, therefore, but with one month's notice or on payment of a month's salary and allowances in lieu of notice.

4. You will have to work in any officer of the Bank or at any branch of the Bank as the Bank may require you to work from time to time and also discharge all the duties which may be assigned to you.

5. You should produce satisfactory evidence of your date of birth and general and other qualifications.

6. You should produce a certificate of physical fitness from a Registered medical practitioner and also three copies of your passport size photo recently taken at your own cost.

7. Candidates belonging to Scheduled caste and Scheduled Tribe should produce a community certificate in original as per specimen enclosed".

It was further stated that if he was agreeable to the above terms and conditions he was required to report at the Staff Training College, II Floor Leelavathi Mansion, 69, Armenian street, Madras-1 at his own expenses on 27-11-1978. The acceptance of the offer by the petitioner was directed to reach the Assistant General Manager (Personnel) on or before the 23rd November, 1978. It was made clear that otherwise the office of appointment would automatically stand cancelled. Thereafter he was required to file a service joining letter in which column 11 was as under :

"Name or names of relations, if any, in the service of the Bank and nature of relationship".

This column was left blank by the petitioner. On 13th December, 1978 the following communication emanated from the Bank to the petitioner.

"Further to our appointment order dated 15-12-1978 you have been posted at our Mount Road Branch please note to report for duty at our Mount Road instead of Konganapuram branch. Other terms and conditions of the appointment order remain unchanged".

Then on 14th of May, 1979 the impugned order was passed stating :

"As per clause 3 of the terms and conditions contained in the appointment order cited above, your ar




























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top