(1.) This is a case where the authorities took up departmental proceedings against the petitioner after a few months of the termination of the service. Therefore, the question arises for determination is whether subsequent initiation of departmental proceedings by the authorities will vitiate an otherwise valid order of termination simplicitcr passed during the period of probation.
(2.) The petitioner was appointed as a Youth Coordinator in Nehru Yuba Kendra Sangathan vide ordci dated 28.9.94 and was placed on probation. During the period of his probation his services was terminated vide order dated 24.5.95. The order reads as follows :
(3.) The language employed in the aforesaid office order shows that it was an order of termination simpliciter during the periad of probation. The matter would have ended there. But the authorities initiated enquiry against him vide memorandum dated 25.9.95 (Annexure-5) levelling a number of charges of misconduct in the discharge of his official duties. From the order dated 20.9.95 (Annexure-4), we find that Shri I. H. Hulkoti was appointed to conduct the enquiry. The counter-affidavit submitted by the respondents shows that the petitioner also participated in the departmental proceedings. The enquiry was conducted on 6.10.95. The report submitted by Enquiry Officer has been annexed by the respondents to their counter affidavit as Annexure-E. Certain except from the report relevant for consideration of the issue at hand is reproduced below:-