IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK JAIN

th

ON THE 19 OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 WRIT PETITION No. 11654 of 2018 PRALEKH TIWARI Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Pankaj Dubey - Advocate with Shri Akshay Khandelwal -

Advocate for the Petitioner.

Shri Anshuman Swamy - Government Advocate for the Respondent/State.

ORDER By way of this Petition, challenge is made to the Order Annexure P-10 dated 28.11.2015 whereby the services of the Petitioner as Probationer have been terminated noting in the last lines of the Order that as per satisfaction recorded by the competent authority, the Petitioner is not likely to shape into a suitable Police Officer and therefore, he being a Probationer is dismissed from service.

2. The aforesaid order is assailed by learned counsel for the Petitioner by contending that the Petitioner has been visited with a stigmatic order and though the petitioner may be stated to be a Probationer but even in cases where the allegation of misconduct or malpractices forms basis, motive and foundation for the discharge or termination or removal of a Probationer then Signature Not Verified it is settled in law that enquiry is required to be conducted. Only where it is a case of discharge simpliciter without casting any stigma and without the allegations of misconduct constituting motive or foundation for discharge of the Probationer only then, the employer can dispense with the enquiry. 3. Asserting the facts of the case, it was argued that the Petitioner qualified written examination for the post of Sub-Inspector conducted by M.P. Professional Examination Board and was drafted to join training at Integrated Police Training Institute, Bhauri, District Bhopal on 22.04.2013 vide Annexure P-1. He successfully completed the training and after completion of first leg of training, he was drafted for training and was asked to join the said Academy vide letter dated 27.07.2013. It is argued that the said Order Annexure P-2 vide clause 7 clearly mentioned that the appointment is on probation for a period of two years and the petitioner would be required to complete all the requisite requirements as expected from a Probationer Police Officer.

4. The Petitioner while undergoing training as Probationer in Police Training Academy, Bhauri, District Bhopal was sanctioned casual leave from 04.12.2013 till 08.12.2013 but thereafter, did not return back to the training center despite availing three days sanctioned casual leave. The Petitioner has relied on various medical Certificates issued to him from time to time by various registered medical practitioners at Gwalior which is the hometown of Petitioner and the Petitioner has also relied on a Certificate issued by the Medical Board constituted by the Civil Surgeon-cum-Hospital Superintendent, District Gwalior mentioning therein that the Medical Board Signature Not Verified has gone through all the medical certificates of the Petitioner and is fully agreeable to the illness of the Petitioner as indicated in the said certificates and declared the Petitioner fit on 22.03.2014.

5. Thereafter, the Petitioner is stated to have reported back at Training Academy, Bhauri at District Bhopal immediately thereafter but he was sent back to his original Unit at District Sagar by order of the Director, Training Academy vide Annexure R-1 dated 22.03.2014, on the ground that the petitioner is absent since long time and therefore, he is being sent back to his Parent Unit i.e, District Police Force, Sagar.

6. Some unconnected events took place in the intervening period as argued by learned counsel for the Petitioner whereby after rejoining at District Police Force on 07.04.2014, the services of Petitioner were terminated by Order Annexure P-6 dated 24.05.2014 on the ground that he has been involved in malpractices at the time of selection and a criminal case has been registered against him. The said order of termination was put to challenge before