S.RAFAT ALAM, J. - (1.) THE order dated 20.01.1999, dismissing the writ petition in default, having been recalled vide order of date passed on the recall application, the writ petition is restored to its original number.
(2.) SINCE the matter is pending since 1996, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, we have heard the matter on merits. The petitioner, who was working as probationer in the State Bank of Indore (hereinafter referred to as the "Bank"), has been terminated by the General Manager of the Bank vide order dated 16.08.1995 on the ground that after adjudging her work and performance she has not been found fit for confirmation and, therefore, has been terminated during the period of probation.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner contended that though the petitioner was probationer, yet the impugned order cast stigma upon the petitioner and, therefore, could not have been passed without giving any opportunity. He further contended that the petitioner has made a complaint against the Branch Manager, respondent no.4 and it is on account of the mala fide action of the respondent no. 4, the impugned order has been passed and, therefore, it is a colourable exercise on the part of the respondents.;