ROHIT ARYA
Krishan Kumar Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent
1. Petitioner upon selection was appointed as a member of the Madhya Pradesh Police under Act V of the Police Act, 1861 and posted as Constable. Regulation 59 of the Madhya Pradesh Regulations (hereinafter referred to as 'the Regulations') is relevant and the same is quoted below :
“59. Probation. Every recruit will be on probation for two years' which may be in two periods of six months each, if the Superintendent considers it desirable. During this probationary period his services may be dispensed with with at any time, if in the opinion of the Superintendent, he is unlikely to become a satisfactory police officer.”
2. Earlier petitioner's services were terminated vide termination order dated 27.2.2015 (Annexure P-4) purportedly on the ground that Criminal Case No.21/2013 for the offence under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 409, 417, 201 of IPC and sections 3(i), 3(ii)/4 of the M.P.Recognized Examination Act, 1937, sections 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act,1988 as well as sections 65 and 66 of the I.T.Act has been registered by the Special Task Force, M.P., Bhopal. The aforesaid termination order was challenged before the Principal Seat by filing Wr
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.