HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN, G. S. SANDHAWALIA
Rama Rani – Appellant
Versus
DAV University, Jalandhar-Pathankot Highway, Village Sarmastpur, Jalandhar – Respondent
JUDGMENT
G.S. Sandhawalia, J. - The issue for consideration in the present Letters Patent Appeal is judgment of the learned Single Judge passed in CWP No.18905 of 2015 Rama Rani v. DAV University , Jalandhar- Pathankot Highway' decided on 29.03.2017, wherein the writ petition was dismissed and the challenge to the termination order of the writ petitioner, who was on probation was held not to be punitive or stigmatic. It was recorded that there was no requirement of holding a departmental inquiry for a probationer and in the absence of any infirmity in the orders passed by the respondents no relief was granted.
2. Counsel for the appellant has vehemently submitted that if the veil is lifted, it is apparently a stigmatic order and there is a report of the Committee against the appellant as per the written statement, which was not referred to by the learned Single Judge. Therefore, it could not be held that the performance was not upto the mark. The impugned order by which the services had been dispensed with on 04.08.2015 (Annexure P-1) talked about Clause 5 (a) of the appointment letter, whereas the issue of probation was as per the Clause 1 of the letter which provided the period o
Dipak Kumar Biswas v. Director of Public Instructions
Chandra Prakash Shahi v. State of U.P.
Dipti Prakash Banerjee v. Satyendra Nath Bose National Centre for Basic Sciences, Calcutta
Executive Committee of Vaish Degree College, Shamli v. Lakshmi Naraian
Kailash Singh v. Managing Committee, Mayo College, Ajmer
Progressive Education Society v. Rajendra (2008) 3 SCC 310
Ratnesh Kumar Choudhary v. Indira Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences, Patna, Bihar
Registrar General, High Court of Gujarat v. Jayshree Chamanlal Buddhbhatti
The main legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between termination simpliciter and punitive termination based on the nature of the inquiry and the purpose of the termination.
Termination of a probationer must follow prescribed procedures; failure to do so renders the termination illegal and potentially stigmatic.
If misconduct is the foundation to pass the order, then an enquiry into misconduct should be conducted and an action according to law should follow. But if it is (sic) notice, it is not incumbent upo....
Termination of a probationer can be valid if based on unsuitability without a misconduct inquiry; such termination is not punitive.
Service matter - Probation period - Order of termination - If allegations constitute a motive and not the foundation for termination then such simple order of termination would be valid - It is found....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.