KEWAL SINGH Vs. H.R.T.C.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was appointed as driver on 30th April, 1991. He was put under probation for a period of two years. The period of probation was extended by another one year and this period of probation was to expire on 2nd May, 1994. Disciplinary proceedings were also initiated against the petitioner on 28th September, 1993.

(2.) A memorandum dated 1st October, 1993 was also issued to the petitioner. The operative portion of this memorandum reads thus : - Therefore, keeping in view the above mentioned position, the undersigned has tentatively reached the conclusion that Sh. Kewal Singh, driver under probation, is removed from service. Sh. Kewal Singh, Driver is granted one opportunity of representing against the above proposed penalty. But, the representation should be based on facts that the above representation would be considered by the undersigned if he wants to make such representation, the same should be received by undersigned within 15 days of the receipt of this Memo and the same will not be accepted after the said period. The above mentioned Memorandum may be duly acknowledged. -

(3.) IT is settled law by now that in case of probationers also, if the order even on the face of it is innocuous, the Courts can lift the veil to find out whether any misconduct was the foundation or basis for the order. However, in this case the impugned order dated 20th December, 193 on the face of it is penal/punitive in nature. The expression removal - has been used in this order. In memorandum dated 1st October, 1993 as many as 8 instances of misconduct have been attributed to the petitioner. In these circumstances, the Court can safely assume that the order dated 20th December, 1993 is founded/based on misconduct as mentioned in memorandum dated 1st October, 1993.