STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. CHINTAN HARISHBHAI VAISHNAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this Letters Patent Appeal, whereby the State seeks to call in question judgment and order dtd. 4/4/2022 of learned Single Judge, though the facts of the case have their own dimensions, the decision- oriented issue to be addressed is whether the services of the respondent-petitioner who was a probationer stood confirmed because of non-extension of probation period beyond permissible.

(2.) The aforesaid question calls for consideration in the context of governing Rule 10A of the Gujarat Civil Services Classification and Recruitment (General) Rules, 1967, which was amended in 1994.

(3.) What was challenged before learned Single Judge was order dtd. 2/3/2019 passed by the competent authority of the revenue department whereby services of the probationer petitioner came to be terminated for the contents and reasons stated in the said order. Learned Single Judge held that the period of probation was over and the petitioner, in accordance with the provisions of Rule 10A of the aforesaid Rules, deserved to be treated to have been deemed confirmed. Consequently, learned Single Judge set aside the said order of termination dtd. 2/3/2019, and granted all consequential benefits.