SATYADEO PRASAD Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The very short question that has cropped up for consideration is whether the order of termination of a probationer teacher with the observation of unsatisfactory performance can at all the called stigmatic and is, therefore, bad and liable to be set aside.

(2.) The writ petitioners, two in number, were appointed as Assistant Professors of Hindi in the Presidency University (the university, for short) by two letters of appointment, both dated May 23, 2016. It was specifically mentioned in the letters of appointment that the service of the petitioners with the university would be governed by its service rules and this included a probation period of one year from the date of joining the university.

(3.) It has been the case of the writ petitioners that in spite of working very diligently they were the victims of academic malice of respondent no. 3 who was the Head of the department of Hindi. They have referred to an incident said to have taken place at a seminar where the respondent no. 3 was alleged to have been annoyed with the petitioner no. 2, Dr. Anil Kumar Puskar. According to them, this was the beginning of the "vendetta" against Dr. Puskar and there was a conscious effort to find Dr. Puskar at fault.