LexHARI SINGH MANN versus THE STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
HAR! Sll'IGH MANN
v.
THE STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.
August 20, !974
[A. N. R•\.Y, CJ., A-"D K. K. MATHEW, J.J
PoA;aB Civil Servic<s (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1952, Rules 8{b)
and ':i--Termination oj servic~ of probation~r on ground of
unfitness
for
o~tU 1q Slate Surice--Exprn:sion "unfit to be appointed'', if carrits
.;,,,,,,,..
Tbe appellant was appointed on 20 May, 1965, on two ye=' probation,
On 1 Jnly, 1967 there was an order cncnding the period of probation by one
year.
On J.faY 20,
1968,
there wa:s an order
ter~inatinp,,, the services ·of
t.Re J"ritioncr. On )uly 20, 1968 there was an order revoking the order of
. termination and ·extending the period of probation for six months from 20th
May, 1968. The orde. of terminaloin was on Jan. 30, 1969. This order
rccitai that, having considere..J him nnfit for appointment to the State Police
Savio: the servi=i of the apP<;llant are dispensed with m ·tho expiry of hi•
cxlen<!ed period of probation. Two rontentions were raised bY. the •PJ"llant
in the lfigh Cowt. Finl, the order of termination was passed on Jan. 30,
1%9, when the petitioner, by reason of expiry Qf 3 year.; stood confirmed on
19/20 November,
1968 and Second, the order of termination was one of
pnnisfzment and the appellant should have bee_n ~ven an opportunity to show
caa<;e against the order of termination under Rule 9 of the Punjab Ci1il Service
Cl'nni5hment and Appeal) Rules, 1952. These contentions were rejected by
the Hi._m Court Hence the appeal to this Court by Sfu:ial Lern: .
IJi;missing the appeal,
..
A
B
c
D
HELD :
Tho object of extending the period of probation is to find out
r.·hethcr the appellant was a fit per.;on. The appellant could not be ronfirmed,
E
till 1"' reriod of probation expirod.. It cannot, therefore, be held that the
appdbnt stood confirmed on 19/20 November, 1968 before the period of pro-
batio-n expired in January, 1969.-
[776A-B]
'
'
(1.) Termination on account of unsatisfactory record will attract rule 9
of t!l:: Punishment Rules..
Fitness W2S a matter to be considered at the time
of ooafirmation.
The order terminating the services is unfitness for appoint·
ment and not on the ground of any turpiUJde to attract Ruic 9 of the Punish-
F
ment Rules, 1952. To hold that the words "unfit to be appointed" mentioned
in th: oder of termination.,. are a sti__mla, '\\i:>uld deprive the authorities to ·
jud,l!C fitness for work or suitability to a PoSt at the time of confirmation.
TcnnWation of services on account of inadequacy for the job or for any
ten1p:amental or other defect not im:olving moral turpitude is not a stigma.
"'\\'hidJ. can ~ called discharge by punishment.
Fitness for the job is one
of the most important reasons for confirmation.
The facts and circum.:tances
do oot show that there was any stigrn?~ attached to the order of termination
and therefore. Rule 9 of the Punjab Civil Service (Punishment & Aµp<:al)
G
Rule>_ 1952 is not attracted in the pcesent ca,;e.
(776G-777B]
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISD!CTIOS : Civil Appeal No.
1955 of
197-0.
Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgment & Order dl!ted the
5th November, 1969 of the Punjab & Haryana Higo Conrt in Civil
Writ No. 309 of 1969.
-
R. K. Garg, S. C. Agarwala and V. l. Francis, for the appellant.
H
A
B·
c
H. S. MANN v. PUNJAB (Ray, C.J.)
775
V. C. Mahajan ard 0. P. Shanna, for the respondents.
The Judgment ci the Court was delivered by
RAY, CJ. This is 2!l appeal by special leave from the jud.;iment
dated 5 November, 1969 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana.
The only person is whether the order of termination of the service
of the appellant who was a ,:>robationer is in viohtion of Rule 9 of
the Punjab Civil Service (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, 1952 ..
The appellant was selected by the Public Service . Commi.sion as
a direct recruit on 20 May, 1965. He was appointed on 26 May,
1965. He joined as a probationer.
The period of probation was
two years.
·
Rule 8(b) of the Punjab Police Service Rules 1959 states that
the services of a member recruited by direct app<iintment may be
dispensed with by the Government on his failing to pass the final
examination at the end of his period of training, or on his
being
reported on during or at the end of his period of probation, 115 unfit
for appointment.
-
D
The order terminating· the
services of the appellant
was
as
E
F
G
H
follows:-
"The President of India is pleased to dispExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.