- (1.) In this Regular Second Appeal, directed against judgment and decree dated 30.1.1980 passed by the then learned Senior Sub Judge with Enhanced Appellate Powers, Chandigarh, the facts beyond controversy are as under: The plaintiff- respondent was initially appointed, as a Beldar in the office of Executive Engineer, Horticulture Division No.1, Chandigarh on 8.3.1969. He continued to function against that appointment till 18.9.1976 and, then, his services were terminated. In the proceedings before the Conciliation Officer, a compromise was effectuated on 15.2.1977 and, in pursuance thereof, the plaintiff- respondent was appointed afresh on probation for a period of six months. Respondent joined duty, in pursuance of the agreement aforesaid, on 19.2.1977. His services were terminated by appellant No.2 by passing the following order (Ex.P.1), which is reproduced as under for facility of reference:- "The services of Shri Raghu Raj son of Shri Jagroop beldar are terminated with immediate effect as his work and conduct during the period of probation has been found unsatisfactory."
(2.) The plea raised by the plaintiff- respondent to the effect that the impugned order stigmatized him and was as a measure of punishment did not find favour of the learned trial Judge who recorded a finding that the impugned termination was valid, it being in accordance with the terms and conditions of the appointment order itself.
(3.) In first appeal, the learned First Appellate Court reversed the finding by holding that the impugned order stigmatized the plaintiffrespondent and it could not have been passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the employee. The learned First Appellate Court further observed that the appointing authority ought to have watched the work and conduct of the plaintiff- respondent for the complete probation period before being able to form an opinion about the quality of functioning and that the impugned order having been passed mid-way the probation period was invalid as it had been passed in an ex parte manner. The defendants- appellants are in appeal before this Court against the view taken by the learned First Appellate Court.;