PGSD HIGH SCHOOL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner - PGSD High School, Hissar through its Secretary Sh.Dawarka Parshad Aggarwal has filed the instant writ petition against respondents i.e. State of Haryana through Secretary, Department of Education (Secondary Education), Chandigarh, Director, Secondary Education, Haryana, Panchkula, District Education Officer, Hissar and Shiv Bahadur, craving for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of order dtd. 27/11/2017 (Annexure P11) passed by respondent No.2 - Director, Secondary Education, Haryana, Panchkula vide which order dtd. 22/11/1987 passed by petitioner - school terminating the services of respondent No.4 - Shiv Bahadur has been set aside as well as order dtd. 21/8/2017 passed by respondent No.3 - District Education Officer, Hissar rejecting the appeal filed by respondent No.4 against the termination order dtd. 21/11/1987 and such respondent No.2 directing reinstatement of respondent No.4 - Shiv Bahadur in service with immediate effect along with all the notional benefits.

(2.) Inter alia, in the petition it is contended that respondent No.4 - Shiv Bahadur was appointed as Chowkidar on regular basis by the petitioner - school on 30/11/1984; as per the terms and conditions of his employment, he was to remain on probation for a period of one year, which could be extended for such further period as the competent authority under rules may determine; the service conditions of respondent No.4 were governed by Haryana Aided School (Security of Service) Act, 1971 and Rules framed under the Act in the year 1974; that as per Rule 8 of Haryana Aided School (Security of Service) Rules, 1984, a person appointed to the post is to remain on probation for a period of two years, if appointed by direct recruitment and one year if appointed otherwise and on completion of period of probation, the appointing authority may confirm such person, if his work and conduct in its opinion was satisfactory or declare that the said employee has completed his period satisfactorily. However, if work and conduct of the employee was not found satisfactory, then his services could be dispensed with, if appointed by direct recruitment and if otherwise, then to revert him to his former post or extend his period of probation; however the total period of probation including the extension could not exceed three years; that because work and conduct of respondent No.4 - Shiv Bahadur was not satisfactory, the petitioner - school terminated his services vide order dtd. 21/11/1987.

(3.) Feeling aggrieved, respondent No.4 - Shiv Bahadur raised an industrial dispute and the matter was referred to the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court, Hissar, which vide award dtd. 16/9/1993 held that termination of services of respondent No.4 was justified and he was not entitled for any relief. The reference was answered accordingly.