Krishan Kumar vs The State of Haryana and Others

G.S. Sandhawalia, J.—The present writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 24.05.1994, Annexure P-5 whereby the services of the teachers/officials appointed on probation in Hindu High School, Ladwa, District Kurukshetra, Haryana, were terminated as per the conditions mentioned in their appointment letter. The deceased petitioner who has now been represented by his legal representatives, pleaded that the petitioner was working as a Peon-cum-Waterman in the Hindu High School, Ladwa with effect from 20.03.1991 and prior to that, he was also appointed on part-time. It was pleaded that he was not given salary and he had to file CWP No. 16679 of 1992 which was disposed of by this Court to settle the claim of the petitioner as per the legal notice by passing a speaking order within 3 months from the receipt of the copy of the order. Respondent No. 2 had rejected his claim vide order dated 01.03.1993 on the ground that the petitioner had not been appointed, especially, against a sanctioned post and was not entitled for the salary. The said order was challenged by filing CWP No. 8256 of 1993 in which notice of motion had been issued but thereafter, respondent No. 3 agreed to give him regular appointment on the condition that he would not claim any salary and accordingly, he had filed an affidavit dated 20.12.1993 that he would withdraw his writ petition and he may be appointed as Peon-cum-Waterman. In pursuance of the said offer, he furnished the affidavit and was given appointment letter on 20.12.1993 and the writ petition was accordingly, dismissed as infructuous on 06.01.1994 on the ground that necessary relief had been granted. Thereafter, the petitioner''s services were again terminated on 24.05.1994 when a new Administrator was appointed. Accordingly, the said termination order was challenged on the ground that there were no reasons given in the impugned order and under what circumstances, his services were terminated.

Written statement was filed by respondent No. 3 in which it was pleaded that the appointment of the petitioner was not made as per law and against the letter dated 04.05.1994 and that the Government had not granted the sanction for the post mentioned above and the Administrator would have to pay the salary to the employee from his own source. Accordingly, the services of the petitioner were terminated due to lack of funds. In the written statement filed by respondents No. 1 & 2 also, similar plea was taken and replication was filed that the appointment was made on the basis of selection and rules regulating the condition of recruitment to service known as Haryana Education Aided School (Security of Service) Rules, 1974 and he was appointed by way of direct recruitment.

A perusal of the appointment letter dated 20.12.1993 goes on to show that the petitioner was appointed as Peon-cum-Waterman with effect from the date he joined duties in the grade of Rs. 750-12-860-15 plus usual allowances and he was on probation for a period of one year and his services could be terminated without assigning any reason to him if his services were found to be unsatisfactory. The relevant portion of the appointment letter is reproduced as under:

Appointment (Appendix-B) No.HHS-116/62/93

Dated:20.12.93

Consequent upon his selection Sh. Krishan Kumar hereby appointed as Peon-cum-Waterman in Hindu High School, Ladwa with effect from the date he join duty in the grade of Rs. 750-12-860-15 plus usual allowance admissible to other employees of the school from time to time on the following terms and conditions:

He shall beon probation for a period of one year in accordance with the rules which can be extended for such further period by the competent authority.

If during probation, if his services are not found satisfactory the same would be terminated without assigning any reason.

Admittedly, the services of the petitioner were terminated on 20.05.1994 by the Administrator, Hindu High School, Ladwa and the relevant portion of the same reads as under:

ORDER

The following teachers/officials who are appointed on probation in Hindu High School, Ladwa, their services are terminated with effect from 24-5-94 Afternoon as per the conditions mentioned in their appointment letter:

1-Sh.Dharam Pal, Math Teacher.

2-Sh.Nathi Ram, Social Science Teacher.

3-Sh.Roshan Lal, Drawing Teacher.

4-Sh.Dharmender Kumar, Clerk

5-Sh.Krishan Kumar, Waterman-cum-Peon.

6-Sh.Surender Kumar, Science Teacher.

Sd/- (K.K. Gupta)

HCS Sub Divisional Officer (C), Thanesar and Administrator Hindu High School, Ladwa.

No. 2451-57/840 Dated 24-5-94.

Counsel for the petitioner has contended that the principles of natural justice was violated and the petitioner should have been heard at least before passing an order, offering him opportunity of being heard. Reliance was placed upon Surinder Kumar Vs. Punjab State Agricultural Marketing Board, Chandigarh & others 1994 (2) RSJ 469.

The submission of the counsel for the petitioner cannot be accepted. The petitioner was appointed on probation and as per the appointment letter itself, his service could be terminated without assigning any reason during the said period which was of one year. The service of the petitioner, along with other employees, were terminated as per the terms mentioned in the appointment letter. It is settled principle that the service of the probationer can be terminated without assigning any reason and rather, if the services are unsatisfactory, the termination order cannot be termed as stigmatic. Hon''ble Supreme Court in Parshotam Lal Dhingra Vs. Union of India (UOI), has laid down this principle and the said principle still continues to hold field which would be clear from the judgment in Ranendra Chandra Banerjee Vs. Union of India (UOI), The said view has been followed thereafter in Pavanendra Narayan Verma Vs. Sanjay Gandhi P.G.I. of Medical Sciences and anr,

The judgment relied upon by the petitioner pertains to a case where an employee was reverted to the post of Head-Clerk to the post of Mandi Supervisor-cum-Fee Collector without being heard. The said facts of the case pertain to a regular employee who had been promoted and then reverted and accordingly, the said judgment is not relevant in the facts and circumstances of the present case since the present case pertains to a probationer who had been terminated. Once the petitioner has been terminated as per the terms of the appointment letter, no fault can be found with the said order. Accordingly, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. Thus, the present writ petition is dismissed without any order as to cost.