GAUTAM KANT NIMAAN Vs. GNCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The services of the petitioner, who was appointed as a Judicial Officer in the Delhi Judicial Service, have been terminated vide orders dated 18th August, 2010 invoking the provisions of Rule 22 of the Delhi Judicial Service Rules, 1970, which reads as under:

(2.) In order to gauge the merit, or otherwise, all these contentions we would like to traverse through the factual matrix leading to the passing of the aforesaid orders.

(3.) The petitioner was appointed as a Member of the Delhi Judicial Service in Scale of `9000 ? 14,500 vide orders dated 23.01.2007 issued by the Lieutenant Governor of National Capital Territory of Delhi. In pursuance thereto, the petitioner joined the service on 02.04.2007. The Delhi Judicial Service is covered by the Delhi Judicial Service Rules, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as ,,the Rules), as amended from time to time. Part V of Rules which contains Rules 20 to 23 deals with ,,probation. Rule 20 (2) thereof stipulates that a person so appointed shall be on probation for a period of two years. The petitioner was also placed on probation for two years. The appointment letter dated 23.01.2007 contained specific to this effect as well and that reads as under: