CHHITARLAL SHIVBAX LAUDWAL Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WRIT petitioner has filed this appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent arising out of order dated 11-5-1994, passed in M. P. No. 2729/83 by Shri A. K. Mathur, J. (as he then was ).

(2.) AFTER selection and recommendation by the Public Service commission, the appellant vide order dated 18-7-1978 was appointed temporarily as Civil Judge, Class II, in M. P. Judicial Service on the condition of completion of six months' training and then on probation for a period of two years. After completion of training the appellant was posted as First additional Judge to the Court of First Civil Judge, Class II at Bhopal vide order dated 28th August, 1978. He was posted as Judicial Magistrate, First class/ivth Civil Judge, Class II at Gwalior vide order dated 8-11-1979. Thereafter, he was transferred from Gwalior to Harsud District Khandwa on 20-5-1980. From there he was transferred on 18-5-1982 to Sarangpur. From sarangpur the appellant was transferred to Shahdol on 9-2-1983. His services were terminated by order dated 30th August, 1983 by giving one month's pay in lieu of notice in exercise of powers under rule 12 (1) of the M. P. Government Servant (Temporary and Quasi Permanent) Service Rules, 1960 (for short Rules of 1960) as his service was not found satisfactory and he was not found suitable for the service in view of rule 24 of M. P. Judicial Service (Classification, Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1955 (for short Rules of 1955 ). The appellant challenged the order on the ground that after completion of six months training the appellant continuously worked satisfactorily for more than two years. As no order either of extension of period of probation or of confirmation was issued, therefore, after the expiry of period of probation, he would be deemed to be confirmed. Against the adverse remark in the year 1988 of monthly disposal being quite poor hardly 19% the appellant made a representation explaining the reason for poor disposal on account of strike of lawyers at Gwalior. Another adverse entry of the next following year about his relationship with the members of the bar being cordial except one or two individual grudges was communicated at sarangpur against which he filed a representation. When he was at Shahdol he was communicated with adverse entry of which he filed representation on 12-9-1983. The appellant averred that no orders were communicated on his representations and abruptly termination of his service in violation of principles of natural justice was passed.

(3.) IN reply to averments made by the appellant in writ petition, it was stated that in view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bina Tiwari vs. State of M. P. , AIR 1988 SC 488 the Full Court after considering the work, conduct and performance of the appellant during the probationary period was not found satisfactory, he was found unsuitable, hence, he was not confirmed and his service was dispensed with under sub-rule (3) of Rule 24 of the Rules of 1955.