(1.)TINS is an appeal from a judgment of Mr. Justice Masud delivered on the 9th january, 1974. In an application by the respondent under Article 226 of the Constitution the learned Trial judge following the decision of Mr. Justice Sabyasachi Mukharji in Siladitya De v. State of West Bengal, reported in 76 CWN 444, had made the rule absolute.
(2.)ON 19 June, 1970, the respondent was selected for appointment as a. Sub-Inspector in the Calcutta Police Force. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, head Quarters, Calcutta, addressed a letter to him in which it was stated inter alia as follows :-
"you have been provisionally selected for appointment as a Sub-Inspector in the Calcutta Police. If you are appointed to the post, then you have to undergo the prescribed course of training in the police Training College, Barrack pore, 24-Parganas for a period of one year. "
After you successfully complete the course of training at the Police training College, you will have to undergo further course of practical training in Police work in different units of the Calcutta Police Force for a period of one year. If you fail to make a suitable progress during your training period at the police Training College or in the calcutta Police, you will be liable to be discharged from service at any time during the training period. 5. If you are finally appointed to the post, then you will be required to report your arrival to the d. I. G. , Training, Police Training college, Barrack pore on the forenoon of 1st July, 1970 where you will have to undergo the requisite course of training. This letter of the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Head Quarters, Calcutta, is dated the 19th June, 1970. There is also another letter addressed to the respondent of the same date by the Central Reserve Officer, Calcutta police, forwarding the aforesaid letter of the Deputy Commissioner. In the central Reserve Officer's letter it is stated:-
"in enclosing the provisional appointment letter, I would request you to call at this office on the 22nd June, 1970 at 1 P. M. to re revive your kits and other necessary instructions, if you agree to the terms and conditions of appointment. "
In May 1971 the final examination was held by the Police Training College at Barrack pore. The respondent appeared at this examination. In June 1971, the result of the final examination was published. The respondent was unsuccessful. On 9 July, 1971, the respondent was discharged as 'unsuitable'. On 12 July, 1971, the order of discharge was published in the Calcutta police Gazette. The said publication was as follows : -
"orders by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Headquarters. The following Cadet Sub-Inspectors sergeants of the Calcutta Police, who were undergoing training at the Police Training College Barrack pore, are discharged from the force with effect from the 8th July, 1971 p. m. as unsuitable (1) (2) Sub-Inspector 204 Soumendra nath Lahiri. (3) (4) Sergeant 228 Siladitya De, (D. C. H. O's Order No. 684 dated 9th July, 1971 ).
(3.)NOW, Rule 46, Sub-rule 3 of the police Regulations in Chapter XV provides, inter alia, as follows :-
"a Probationary Sub-Inspector or sub-Inspectors shall be confirmed on the completion of his or her probationary period unless the Deputy Commissioner, Headquarters, shall make an order extending his or her period of probation or discharging him or her from service or in the case of a promoted Sub-Inspector or Sub-Inspectors reverting him or her to his or her substantive rank. Any order for such extension of the probationary period or reversion or discharge shall indicate grounds on which the order is made, ****