MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, RAIPUR versus ASHOK KUMAR MISRA

Citation: [1991] 2 S.C.R. 320 · Decided: 16-04-1991 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: N.M. KASLIWAL · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, RAIPUR 
v. 
ASHOK KUMAR MISRA 
APRIL 16, 1991 
[N.M. KASLIWA.L AND K. RAMASWAMY, JJ.) 
Madhya Pradesh Government Servants' Central Conditions of 
Service Rules, 1961: Rule 8-Probationer-Expiry of prescribed 
period of probation-Termination of service-Whether Valid-
Whether entitled to right to deemed confirmation-Madhya Pradesh 
Civil Services Classification. Control and Appeal Rules, 1966: Rule 9A 
~,-­
and Municipal Officers' and Servants' Recruitment Rules: Rule 14-
Whether applicable. 
The respondent was appointed in the appellant Corporation and 
put on probation for a period of two years. About three months after 
the completion of two years' period he was served with one month's 
notice for termination of his service. Challenging the termination order, 
the respondent filed a suit for declaration that the termination without 
enquiry and opportunity of being heard was violative of Rule 9 A of the 
Madhya Pradesh Civll Services Classification, Control and Appeal 
;;,-
Rules 1%6 and that he became a permanent employee of the Corpora-
tion with continuity of service and arrears of salary. The trial court 
dismissed the suit, and on appeal, it was confmned. The High Court 
allowed the respondent's second appeal and decreed the suit. 
In the appeal, by special leave, before this Court, on behalf of the 
appellant-Corporation it was contended that the respondent being a 
-.< 
probationer, would acquire permanent status only on confirmation, 
that the High Court had committed manifest error in law in holding 
that on the expiry of two years' period of probation, the respondent 
must be deemed to have been confmned under Rule 14 of the Municipal 
Officers' and Servants' Recruitment Rules, which were no longer in 
force, and that Rule 8 of the Madhya Pradesh Government Servants' 
General Conditions of Service expressly provided confirmation of pro-
bation as a condition precedent and since notice terminating respon-
dent's service was issued, in terms of the rules, before confirmation, it 
was valid in law. 
On behalf of the respondent, it was contended that by operation of 
H 
the resolution passed by the Municipal Corporation under Section 25 of 
320 
..
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION v. A.K. MISRA 
321 
the Central Provinces and Berar Municipality Act, 1922, the Municipal 
Officers and Servants was governed by recruitment rules thereunder, 
that since no action was taken by the appellant Corporation to dispense 
with the respondent's service, on the expiry of the period of two years, 
as envisaged in Rule 14 of the Municipal Officers' and Servants' 
Recruitment Rules, the respondent must be deemed to have been con-
firmed, and consequently, the only power the Corporation had was to 
terminate the respondent's service in accordance with the Classifica-
tion, Control and Appeal Rules, after conducting an enquiry and giving 
him reasonable opportunity, that too for misconduct, but since no such 
procedure was adopted, the notice was illegal and the High Court was 
justified in granting the decree. 
Allowing the appeal, this Court, 
A 
B 
c 
HELD: 1.1 Under the Note to sub-rule (2) of Rule 8 of the Madhya 
Pradesh Govt. servant's, General Conditions of Service Rules, 1961 if the 
probationer is neither confirmed nor discharged from service at the end 
D 
of the period of probation, he should be deemed to have been continued 
in service as probationer subject to the condition of his service being ter-
minated on the expiry of a notice of one calendar month, given in 
writing by either side. As per sub-rule ( 6) on passing the prescribed 
departmental examination and on successful completion of the period of 
probation, the probationer should be confirmed in the service or post to 
which he has been appointed. Then he becomes an approved proba-
E 
tioner. Therefore, after the expiry of the period of probation and before 
its confirmation, he would be deemed to have been continued in service 
as probationer. [37SF-H] 
1.2 Comirmation of probation wonld be subject to satisfactory F 
completion of the probation and pass in the prescrjbed examinations. 
Expiry of the period of probation, therefore, does not entitle him with 
a right to deemed comirmation. The rule contemplates to pass an 
express order of confirmation in that regard. By issue of notice of one 
calander month in writing by either side, the tenure conld be put to an 
end, [326A-B] 
· 
1.3 If the rules do not empower the appoin

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.