ANTHONYS SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOL Vs. ROHINI GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this writ petition, the petitioner-school impugns the order of the Delhi School Tribunal (DST) dated 30.7.2008. By the impugned order the Delhi School Tribunal allowed the appeal of the respondent no.1 and set aside her termination of services with full back wages. The Delhi School Tribunal has held that respondent no.1 will stand confirmed after initial period of probation. It has been held that her services could not have been extended after the first year of probation. The DST has held that extension of period of probation has to be within the first year of probation itself and not after three months of the expiry of the order of probation and in such circumstances, the employee is deemed to be confirmed after the first year of probation. The Delhi School Tribunal has buttressed its findings by observing that no memo was given to the respondent no.1 during her first period of probation to show unsatisfactory work.

(2.) I have recently held in the case of Hamdard Public School Vs. Directorate of Education & Anr. (W.P.(C) 8652/2011 decided on 25.07.2013) as under:

(3.) IN the present case, respondent no.1 was first given an adhoc appointment in view of the fact that exigencies of the work had occurred. This appointment order was made for a period of 315 days w.e.f 4.7.2005 till 15.5.2006. Respondent no.1 was thereafter appointed on probation for one year in terms of the Service Agreement dated 3.7.2006 and which provided in para 1 that probation period can be extended for one year at the sole discretion of the school. Probation period was further extended for one year w.e.f 3.7.2007 by the letter dated 5.10.2007 of the petitioner ­school. Respondent no.1s services were ultimately terminated vide the letter of the petitioner-school dated 15.5.2008 and which reads as under:-