- (1.) The appellant in these appeals has assailed the validity and correctness of the order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court in the writ petition as well as the order made in the review petition rejecting the same. The only point that arises for consideration in the light of the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties is: whether there has been compliance with Regulation 2.3 of Chapter VIII contained in the Punjab University Calendar, Vol. I, 1994 Edn. The said Regulation reads: "A teacher will ordinarily be appointed on one year's probation after which he will normally be confirmed if his work and conduct are found satisfactory. It would be obligatory on the part of a Governing Body to notify to the teacher in writing before the expiry of one year's probationary period, whether he has been confirmed or his period of probation has been extended and in absence of such a notice the teacher would be deemed to have been confirmed. The probationary period shall in no case be extended beyond two years from the date of appointment."
(2.) The facts that are not in dispute are that the appellant has been serving as a Lecturer in A.S. College of Women, Khanna, District Ludhiana for several years. She was appointed as the Principal on 4.6.1997 on a probation period of one year. She joined duty as the Principal on 5.6.1997. On 4.6.1998 a resolution was passed by the Sub-Committee of the College extending her probation period by one more year. On 24.5.1999 i.e. before the extended period of probation was over, the Sub-Committee of the College resolved to terminate her services as the Principal on not being satisfied with her work. However, she was given the option to continue in the College as a Lecturer. It was also resolved to pay one month's salary to her in lieu of notice.
(3.) The appellant, aggrieved by the order of termination of her services as the Principal, filed a writ petition before the High Court challenging the same. The ground urged before the High Court was that before the expiry of the initial probation period of one year, no notice was given to the appellant intimating that her probation has been extended. The High Court, after considering the rival contentions held that there was compliance with Regulation 2.3 aforementioned and in that view dismissed the writ petition. The review petition filed by her was also dismissed.;