UNION OF INDIA Vs. ARUN KUMAR ROY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by Special Leave is directed against the Judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court on 7-12-1981, setting aside, in appeal, the Judgment of a learned single Judge. The Union of India and its Officers are the appellants. The facts in brief, necessary to understand the dispute involved in the case are as follows :

(2.) The main question debated at the Bar by the respective counsel is whether in the case of the respondent it was incumbent upon the Authorities to pay notice salary along with the termination notice or whether it was sufficient if lie was informed that he was entitled to such salary on his termination. A resolution of this dispute depends upon consideration of the nature and terms of his appointment. To appreciate this, it is necessary to look into the Order of appointment and relevant points of law governing the terms of service.

(3.) The respondent strongly pleaded that he was appointed to a substantive post since he was placed on probation. If his appointment was purely temporary it was not necessary to place him on probation. The case of the appellant on the other hand was that the Order of appointment itself indicated that the respondent was appointed as a temporary hand and that he did not become a regular hand simply because he was put on probation, The termination in this case took place before the expiry of the extended, period of probation which the authority concerned was entitled to do under the relevant rules.