K. PRAKASH Vs. PRINCIPAL DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition, the petitioner is assailing order dtd. 29/10/2022 (Annexure-J) issued by the respondent No.1, whereby, the petitioner has been discharged from service.

(2.) Relevant facts for the adjudication of the case are that, the petitioner was appointed as Typist as per order dtd. 7/1/2011 by the 2nd respondent herein (Annexure-D). Thereafter, the petitioner continued to work in the 3rd respondent and during the said period, the petitioner has passed the relevant Departmental examination. It is further stated in the writ petition that, while the petitioner was on probation, the respondent No.1 extended the probationary period to improve his performance and ultimately, the petitioner was discharged from service as per order dtd. 29/10/2022 (Annexure- J). Feeling aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has presented this writ petition.

(3.) I have heard M. Krishappa, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Raghavendra G. Gayatri, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.