S.B.Sinha, J. - (1.) This application is directed against the office order dated 15/9/1993 as contained in Annexure 'D' to the writ application whereby and whereunder the petitioners' period of probation was extended and also an order dated 15/9/1993 whereby and whereunder his duties have been curtailed.
(2.) The fact of the matter lies in a very short compass. The writ petitioner joined Kulti Hospital of Respondent No. 1 in May, 1981. Prior thereto he was posted at Bokaro Hospital of Bokaro Steel Plant of Steel Authority of India Ltd. The writ petitioner was in E-3 grade for over 7 years and thereafter he was promoted to E-4 grade in 1988 which came into force w.e.f. 30th June, 1988 only for the purpose of seniority. The petitioner was made Hospital Incharge upon transfer of Dr. V. Gupta, the then hospital incharge, in routine manner. The petitioner was promoted to E-5 grade in February, 1993. The said promotion was to take effect from the date of assumption of higher responsibility. However, the said order of promotion was given effect on 31st December, 1992 for the purpose of seniority as per Promotion Policy & Rules for promotion. He allegedly assumed charge on promotion on 15/2/1993. He was to remain on probation for a period of six months. By reason of the impugned order dated 14/9/ 1993 as contained in Annexure "C" to tile writ application his period of probation was extended. By the impugned order dated 15/9/1993, his duties have been re-allotted.
(3.) Mr. Basu, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that on the expiry of the probationary period the petitioner was entitled to automatic confirmation particularly in view of the fact that he had been promoted w.e.f. 31/12/1992 and thus he must be held to have assumed charge in E-5 grade on that date. It was submitted that in any event, the probationary period could not have been extended one month after the expiry of the period of probation. The learned Counsel submitted that the impugned order has been passed mala fide as the petitioner did not pass medical bills of Sri S. N. Upadhay, only whereafter, repressive measure began to be taken against him. The learned Counsel submitted that only to feed fat to his grudge Sri Upadhay had issued a notice alleging that the petitioner did not attend Sri Subrata Mukhopadhyay, an employee of the company, who was admitted in the hospital in a very critical condition. The petitioner by the said letter was called upon to explain the circumstances under which he had not visited the Kulti Hospital. He submitted a show cause. By a letter dated 24/7/1993 Dy. General Manager found petitioner's explanation not satisfactory but the same being first recorded lapse, he was cautioned to be careful in future in adequately managing the hospital affairs.;