Mehar Singh, C.J. - (1.) This is an appeal under clause 10 of the Letters Patent by Harbans Singh Grewal, appellant, from the order, dated April 25, 1967, of a leaned Single Judge.
(2.) It was on June 1, 1954, that the appellant retired from the Army, as a lieutenant -colonel. He was, on April 12, 1930, on the recommendation of the Punjab Public Service Commission, appointed a temporary Block Development Officer in the Development and Panchayat Department on a probation of two years provided the post continued, with a rider that the period of probation could be extended as and when considered necessary His appointment was alongwith some twenty -nine others. Copy of the order is Annexure 'A' to his petition. In that it is also stated that the appellant was liable to be reverted even without notice or his services could be terminated and even without notice, as the case may be, if his work or conduct during the period of probation was not found satisfactory. Confirmation was to be made subject to the condition that the post was made permanent and to the appellant passing a departmental examination and 'other factors', though this last expression does not appear to find any further elaboration in that order. The order made it clear that there could be a period after the expiry of the period of probation and before confirmation, during which the services of the appellant were liable to termination without assigning any reason or giving one month is notice. These were the conditions on which the appellant joined service. It appears that on October 12, 1961 he applied for exemption from passing the departmental examination, but that request was turned down by the Government's communication in November 1961 (copy Annexure 'AA/I' to the petition). The reason given was that exemption was available to only Block Development and Panchayat Officers who were over 45 years old or who had 20 years' service at their credit on August 10, 1960, none of the two conditions being available in the appellant's case.
(3.) On December 16, 1965, a show -cause notice under rule 8 of the Punjab Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1952, was served on the appellant why he should not be stopped at the efficiency bar with effect from April 25, 1965, on the basis of unsatisfactory record of service and for not completing the period of probation satisfactorily, and the stoppage was to be till he passed the departmental examination and obtained certificate of completion of period of probation satisfactorily. It was suggested that the stoppage at the efficiency bar will be with cumulative effect (copy Annexure ' CC/1' to the petition ). On January 14, 1966, the appellant gave his explanation to the show -cause notice (copy Annexure CC/2' to the petition). On November 17, 1966, the Government proceeded to make the order (copy Annexure 'C' to the petition), after consulting the Punjab Public Service Commission, stopping the appellant at the efficiency bar, with cumulative effect, from April 25, 1965, for a period of one year, as he had not cleared the departmental examination. By a communication of October 15, 1966 (copy Annexure 'B' to the petition), the Government proceeded to certify that the appellant had completed his period of probation with effect from April 25, 1966, but made the certificate subject to the condition that on that account he could not claim confirmation. On November 25, 1966, the Government passed an order (copy Annexure 'D' to the petition) extending the period of probation of the appellant to April 24, 1967, ' as he had not cleared the departmental examination. 'It was said that the certificate regarding completion of his probationary period, issued on October 15, 1966, thereby cancelled. On January 19, 1967, the appellant was placed under suspension 'pending departmental enquiry to enquire into the allegations against him.;