Alok Sharma, J. - (1.) THE case of the petitioner is that he was working on the post of Conductor with the respondent - RSRTC for about 12 years. Let he has been treated as a probationer and removed from service without any inquiry. It has been submitted that under Clause 8 of the Rajasthan State Road Transport Workers and Workshop Employees Standing Order, 1965 (hereinafter 'the Standing Order of 1965') the period of probation in respect of drivers and conductors is two years extendable by a maximum of six months. And the petitioner's confirmation was not subject to passing of any trade test or departmental examination. Consequently he was entitled to be confirmed at the end of 2 -1/2 years of a probation but was not so arbitrarily. And no order of confirmation was passed. Yet in terms of Standing Orders of 1965 the petitioner cannot be treated as a probationer.
(2.) IT has been prayed that the order of termination dated 7.1.2015, wrongly treating the petitioner as a probationer trainee without conducting any enquiry compliant with natural justice be declared null and void and it be directed that the petitioner is entitled to be confirmed on the post of Conductor and granted regular scale of pay looking to the fact that he has worked for about 12 years on fixed remuneration on the post of Conductor after regular appointment on compassionate grounds following the death of his father on 17.12.1998 when he was in service of the respondent RSRTC. Reply to the petition has been filed. It has been submitted that the petitioner has a remedy of appeal under clause 35(vii) of the Standing Orders of 1965 where -under all the orders of punishment are appealable to the next higher authority within a period of 15 days from the date of passing of the order. It has however been admitted that on the death of the petitioner's father while working as a Class -IV employee with the respondent Corporation, the petitioner was appointed on compassionate grounds on 13.5.2003 on a fixed salary of Rs. 2,500/ - p.m. as a probationer trainee for a period of two years. It has however, not been denied that the maximum period of probation of a Conductor appointed in the service of RSRTC cannot be more than 2 -1/2 years in the aggregate. Reference has however been made to the conduct of the petitioner while in service of the respondent - RSRTC stating that he was issued notices continuously on as many as 22 occasions upto the Month of March 2014 and in these circumstances he was not confirmed on the post of Conductor. It has been submitted that the petitioner was assigned duty on 30.12.2014 on the Ajmer -Masuda -Ajmer route on a bus run by the RSRTC and during a sudden inspection of vehicle, five passengers were found to be travelling without tickets from whom the petitioner had already received the fare. A clear case of cheating and misappropriation. A show cause notice dated 1.1.2015 was issued to the petitioner and the petitioner directed to submit his reply within three days. Yet the petitioner did not file any reply to the show cause notice within the prescribed time. Consequently, in terms of conditions No. 5 and 9 of the appointment order dated 13.5.2003 and taking into consideration the history of the previous misconduct/infractions of the petitioner, his services were discontinued vide order dated 7.1.2015 in the interest of the respondent Corporation. A regular departmental enquiry was not necessary against the petitioner, only a probationer trainee, submitted counsel for RSRTC. Consequently the order of termination can not be put to challenge before this Court.
(3.) HEARD . Considered.;