(1.) The brief facts of the case are that on 28th February, 1990, the petitioner was appointed as an Instructor in Tailoring, Knitting and Embroidery in the office of Chandigarh Scheduled Castes Financial and Development Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as the 'Corporation'). She was put on probation for a period of one year. A copy of the order has been attached as Annexure P-1. After successful completion of the probationary period, the petitioner was made regular vide order dated 5th April, 1991. A copy of that order regularising the services of the petitioner has been attached as Annexure P-2. Another order was issued on 30th March, 1993 (Annexure P-3) confirming the petitioner with immediate effect in the grade of Rs.950-1800, with an initial start of Rs.1000/-. On 9th December, 1993, the petitioner's services were terminated by passing the following order:-
(2.) The case of the petitioner is that once the petitioner was a confirmed employee of the Corporation, her services could not be dispensed with by a simple order. Her services could only be dispensed with by holding a departmental enquiry if the services were being terminated on the ground of misconduct. The only other way to terminate the services of a confirmed employee is to abolish the post and terminate the services of the junior most employee in that cadre. None of these two eventuality existed in the present case, and, therefore, the order of termination was wholly arbitrary and liable to be set aside.
(3.) The learned counsel for the respondents, however, submitted that the petitioner's services were governed by the Rules known as the Chandigarh Scheduled Castes Financial and Development Corporation Employees Service Rules, 1988. According to Rule 5.1 of these Rules, a permanent employee's services could be terminated by giving three months' notice on either side or pay in lieu of the notice period. Under this Rule, the services of the petitioner were rightly terminated.