(1.) PETITIONER was appointed as Dy. S.P. (Company Commander/Quarter Master) in C.R.P.F. on temporary basis on 19.8.72. During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner died and the legal heirs of the deceased petitioner have been brought on record. Counsel for the petitioner has contended that in terms of appointment of the petitioner after he had put in two years of service and no order prolonging the period of probation having been passed by the respondent, the petitioner would be deemed to have been regularised in the service. Alternatively, it was contended by the counsel for the petitioner that even if the service of the petitioner was terminated pursuant to sub Rule (5) of Rule 108, one month's notice in terms of the said rule before terminating the service of the petitioner was required to be given to the petitioner. Lastly, it was contended by the counsel for the petitioner that mental illness of the petitioner was occasioned during the course of his employment and therefore termination simplicitor of the petitioner was wholly unjustified and illegal. The petitioner ought to have been given some other jobs commensurate to his health. Counsel for the petitioner has invited our attention to some certificates issued by the hospital, wherein, it was mentioned that the petitioner was fit to join duty. However, the said certificate is of a later date. He has further contended that this case is squarely covered by the judgment of Division Bench of this Court in Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. Shad Ram, LPA. 650/2002, decided on September 12, 2002.
(2.) COUNSEL for the respondent has justified the order passed by the respondent on the ground that mental condition of the petitioner was such that he could not be retained in the Force in any capacity.
(3.) LET us first deal with the arguments of counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner having not been granted further probation after two years was deemed to have been regularised in the Force. Rule 108 of the CRPF rules is as under: