N.L.Ganguly, J. - (1.) THE petitioner was employed as a Junior Engineer in U. P. Textile Corporation Ltd., Kanpur in 1982 the petitioner was given appointment on a consolidated salary of Rs. 550 p.m. plus residential accom modation. THE post was, thereafter on 18-3-93 redesignated as Junior Engineer. Later the post was redesignated as Shift Engineer. It is said that the appointment of the petitioner as Junior Engineer which was again designa ted as Shift Engineer was a permanent post with the respondents. THE respon dents have framed fundamental Bye-laws, 1978. "Rule 3 (ij) 'Permanent post' means a post carrying a definite rate (consolidated, fixed, time-scale or other kind) of pay and created as a permanent post by the Board or by an authority exercising delegated powers." It is also stated that the said post is permanent sanctioned post by the Board of Directors of respondent No. 1.
(2.) THE petitioner said to have assumed charge on the post on 10-7-82 and therefore as per Rule 17 of the Recruitment and Promotion Bye-laws of 1978, the probation for direct recruitment as provided is for two years proba tion commencing from the date on which he assumed charge on the post. As per Rule 17 of the Recruitment and Promotion Bye-laws of 1978, the com petent authority had the discretion of extending the period of probation for one year only. Rule 19 of the said bye-laws provides that the petitioner shall be confirmed on his post at the end of the original or extended period of probations if the appointing authority is satisfied upon the report of the supervisor/officer or otherwise satisfied that the Probationer has made due use of his opportunities of service, has completed successfully such training as may have been prescribed and is otherwise fit for confirmation. The petitioner stated and the fact is not denied that the post of Junior Engineer redesignated as Shift Engineer do not require any training. Since petitioner completed probationary period on 10-7-84, which was not extended by the respondents under the proviso to Rule 17 of the Bye-laws, the petitioner shall be deemed to have confirmed on the post of Junior Engi neer/Shift Engineer at the end of the probationary period. The petitioner stated to have received annual increment other than the name at the stage of efficiency bar of the petitioner was required to be granted upon completion of each year of satisfactory service and accordingly respondent No. 1 was granted annual increment of Rs. 50 and also Rs. 50 on rationalisation totalling to Rs. 100 w.e.f. 1-10-83. Further increment of Rs. 100 p.m. was granted w.e.f. 1- 10-84 and the pay respectively at the rate of Rs. 650 and Rs. 750 per month.
(3.) THE petitioner's service was terminated by the order dated 21/25-2-86, a copy of the same has been annexed as Annexure-5 with the writ petition. THE petitioner has categorically stated that the department also deducted General Provident Fund from the pay of the petitioner and a good some has been deducted already from his salary as G. P. F. The petitioner challenged the order of termination on two grounds. Firstly, that the order dated 21/25-2-86 is an arbitrary, capricious and passed under colourable exercise of power of the respondents. The petitioner being confirmed employee, could not be terminated by giving one month's notice as he had the right to hold the post. The petitioner's thirdly submitted that the post of Junior Engineer/Shift Engineer is a permanent post which has not been abolished and there is no justification or administrative reason to terminate the petitioner's services, as was done.;