STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. LAXMI NARAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IT is defendants' special appeal filed against order of learned Single Judge, dt. 04. 03. 97 dismissing Civil First Appeal No. 95/91 and affirming judgment & decree dt. 22. 12. 90 passed by Additional District Judge Dholpur in Civil Suit No. 18/83 (28/79 ).

(2.) FACTS, in brief, relevant for examining controversy, are that respondent (plaintiff) was appointed after his regular selection on the post of Constable in Rajasthan Police vide order dt. 07. 08. 74 on two years' probation, but because of unsatisfactory service during probation, his services were terminated vide order dt. 25. 06. 76 which is reproduced as under:- " Constable Laxminarayan No. 87-A. P. , was appointed vide this office D. O. E. No. 466 dated 07. 08. 74 on two years probation. During this period, his work was found unsatisfactory. He is habitual absentee and his general reputation has been reported to be very bad. He has also not undergone recruits training as yet. Const. Laxminarayan No. 87 A/p is discharged from service with immediate effect. His absence period may be counted as F. O. L. Sd/- Dy. Supdt. of Police, Bharatpur"

(3.) SHRI Agrawal has also urged that finding recorded with regard to order of termination to be stigmatic, for which inquiry was required to be initiated, is totally perverse. According to him order of termination has been passed in due compliance of R. 36 of Rajasthan Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1974, and it cannot be said to be stigmatic order, and being a probationer, no right was otherwise conferred to hold the post, thus appellant was not under obligation to hold any disciplinary inquiry; in such circumstances, finding recorded in this regard by learned Trial Court affirmed by learned Single Judge without examining evidence on record is not legally sustainable.