A.N. Dikshita, J. - (1.) By means of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner has prayed for (1) a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 2-11-1981 terminating the petitioner's services and the order dated 24-4-1982 rejecting the petitioner's appeal against the aforesaid order, and, (2) a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay his entire arrears of salary and allowances in accordance with law.
(2.) The facts as emerge from the records arc : The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Manager (Technical) in U.P. Financial Corporation, Kanpur, respondent No. 1, and posted at Bareilly, by an order of appointment dated 17-11-1977 passed by the Managing Director of the U.P. Financial Corporation, respondent No. 2, which is filed as Annexure 1 to the writ petition. The appointment order dated 17-11-1977 contains clauses (2) and (5) which are relevant and are reproduced below "That they should understand that appointments on the year's probation from the date of joining their duties and may be terminated at any time without notice. Their appointments are further subject to their character and antecedents being found satisfactory." "5, Please also note that the appointments shall be subject to the terms and conditions laid down in the Stall' Regulations of the Corporation."
(3.) In terms of clause (2) of the appointment letter the petitioner was to remain on probation for a period of one year from the date of his joining. The petitioner joined the services of the Corporation on 29-11-1977. The probationary period of the petitioner expired on 28-11-1978. After the expiry of the period of probation the respondents, did not pass any order either extending the period of his probation or terminating his services in terms of clause (2) of the appointment letter and the petitioner continued in service. However, by an order dated 7-12-1979 communicated vide letter No. FCA. Estt 71-80 dated 7/10-12-1979 the period of probation of the petitioner was extended by respondent No. 2 for a further period of one year. Nothing was done after the expiry of this period as well and the respondent No. 2 by an order dated 2-11-1981 terminated the services of the petitioner with immediate effect. The order further stated that the petitioner will be paid one month's pay in lieu of the notice as per U.P. Financial Corporation Staff Regulations 1961 (herein, after called the Staff Regulations) against this order dated 2-11-1911 terminating the services of the petitioner an appeal was preferred by the petitioner to the Board of Directors of respondent No. 1 under staff Regulation 41 read with Staff Regulation 42 (I )(b) on 30-11-1981. The petitioner was informed vide communication dated 24-4-1982 that the appeal had been rejected by the Chairman. Hence this petition.;