JUDGMENT

Pradeep Nandrajog, J. The respondent was offered appointment on October 17, 1995, as an Assistant Teacher under the Municipal Corporation of Delhi. She was to be on probation for 2 years. The relevant portion of the letter offering appointment to the respondent read as under:

"1. Probation period shall be for two years.

2. The appointment is purely temporary and the appointee or the appointing authority can terminate the same without disclosing any reason by one month's prior notice or one month's pay in lieu thereof, nevertheless the right to terminate the same immediately on the expiry of notice period or prior thereto shall be at the discretion of the authority.

xxx

4. In case, the character, conduct and devotion to duty on the part of the appointee proved to be doubtful, he/she shall not be paid the wages even for the days he/she put in duty.

xxx

9. In case, the appointee is found to be unfit or incapable by the Medical Officer, MCD during medical/test examination, his/her wages for the days he/she puts in shall not be paid and services put in by him/her shall be deemed to have been terminated w.e.f. the very appointment."

2. On the same date i.e. October 17, 1995, the respondent accepted the aforesaid appointment offered to her. The relevant portion of the letter dated October 17, 1995 written by the respondent reads as under:

"1. I accept the above terms and condition of the appointment.

7. Within 20 days of my taking over charge in the School, I shall, having obtained letter of medical check up from Education Department (Zonal Office), undergo medical check up."

3. The respondent joined duty in the MCD Primary School in Nand Nagri, O-Block, New Delhi on October 21, 1995. The school was closed for the next 3 days on account of Diwali. On reopening of the school i.e. on October 26, 1995 the respondent reported for duty.

On the very next day i.e. on October 27, 1995 the respondent did not report for duty.

4. This is where the problem began in the instant case. She only worked for two days.

5. It is the claim of the respondent that she suddenly fell ill on October 27, 1995, due to which she could not report for duty. She claims that on the same day i.e. October 27, 1995, she sent an application to the Headmistress of the school stating therein that she is unable to report for duty due to her ill-health and would resume duty immediately on improvement in her health. As claimed by her, the health of the respondent improved on February 29, 1996, on which date she claims to have met the Headmistress of the school in her office and submitted an application requesting that she be allowed to join duty at the school. Together with the said application, the respondent claims to have annexed a medical certificate dated February 29, 1996 issued by a private practitioner (doctor) recording that the respondent was suffering from Post Partien Hepatitis (Unal) since October 10, 1995 and she is fit to join duty with effect from February 29, 1996.

6. On the other hand, it is claimed by the petitioner that after working for just 2 days, the respondent absented herself from duty for a period commencing from October 27, 1995 till February 28, 1996 without giving any intimation to the school authorities regarding her absence. On February 29, 1996 her husband visited the school and submitted an application dated February 29, 1996, which recorded that the respondent was sick during the period of her absence from duty and she sought permission to join the school. As per the petitioner since the application was not accompanied by a proper medical certificate regarding the illness of the respondent, coupled with the fact that said application was not submitted by the respondent in person, the petitioner did not allow the respondent to join duty at school. It is further claimed by the petitioner that as per the terms of her appointment, the respondent was required to undergo medical examination within 20 days of her joining duty. S