MOINUDDIN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner by this writ petition has prayed that his order of termination dated 22-12-1989 (Annex. 4) may be quashed and the petitioner may be declared to be confirmed on the post of Additional District Judge on and from 12-1-1990.

(2.) THE petitioner in pursuance of the advertisement applied for appointment to the Rajasthan Higher Judicial Service and after selection he came to be appointed as Additional District and Sessions Judge by the order dated 31-12-1986 on probation for a period of two years and thereafter on 9. 1. 1987 vide Annex. 1 he was posted as additional District and Sessions Judge, Baran. THE petitioner has not placed on record the order dated 31. 12. 1986 appointing him on probation. However, his period of probation was extended by the order dated 9. 3. 1989 for another period of two months which has been placed on record as Annex. 2. THEreafter his period of probation was further extended by the order dated 10-5-1989 upto 31-12-1989. However, the petitioner's services were thereafter discharged by the order dated 22-12-1989, the copy whereof has been placed on the record an Annex. 4. Against this the petitioner filed a representation to the Governor of Rajasthan and this representation was referred to the High Court for consideration. THE petitioner has been informed vide the communication of the Registrar, Rajasthan High Court dated 8-6- 1990 that the matter was placed before the Full Court on 25-5- 1990 for consideration and the same has been rejected. A copy of this letter dated 8-6-1990 has been placed on the record as Annex. ' 6. Aggrieved against his discharge from service the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

(3.) A return has been filed by the respondent No. 2 and the respondent has submitted that all the material relating to the petitioner's services was placed before the Full Court and the Full Court after being satisfied resolved that the petitioner should be discharged from service. It is submitted that the Registrar (Vig.) was also sent to make a detailed enquiry and he also submitted his report and the report submitted by Hon'ble Mr. N. M. Kasliwal, J. were also placed before the Full Court as well as the report of the three member's Committee which disposed of the petitioner's representation against his adverse Annual Confidential Reports was also placed before the Full Court and the Full Court resolved that the petitioner's services shall be discharged as he was on probation and he has not made sufficient use of his opportunities.