- (1.) We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings of the Special Appeal.
(2.) This Special Appeal arises out of judgment and order dated 18.12.2012 passed by learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 2173 of 1997 (SS), whereby while allowing the writ petition the termination order of respondent no. 4 has been quashed.
(3.) The brief facts leading to filing of this Special Leave Petition are that respondent no.4 was appointed technician in Class-IV on probation for one year on 17.4.1993 after approval of Regional Higher Education Officer. Though the work and conduct of the respondent were found to be satisfactory but he was asked to and thus worked under a care-taker and his period of probation was extended from 17.9.1994. It is further contended that on 25.7.1994, the respondent could not come to the college due to unavoidable circumstances and submitted an application for leave. Later an explanation was called for and the matter was dropped with warning. On 8.4.1995 his probation period was extended by one more year i.e. upto 17.4.1995. The respondent remained absent from 02.11.1995 to 11.11.1995 which was treated to be unauthorized. Thus his explanation was again called to which he is said to have given a satisfactory reply. However, vide order dated 19.3.1996 the services of the respondent were terminated with immediate effect. The respondent thus submitted representation on 22.3.1996 to D.I.O.S. placing all the facts.;