LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA Vs. HARIPAD ROHIDAS
LAWS(JHAR)-2005-8-48
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on August 22,2005

Life Insurance Corporation Of India Through The Divisional Manager Appellant
VERSUS
Haripad Rohidas Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) THIS appeal, at the instance of the Life Insurance Corporation of India, is directed against the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 27th March, 2003, allowing the writ application filed by respondent No. 1 herein, being C.W.J.C. No. 2086 of 1996 (R), quashing the order dated 21st March, 1995, by which the petitioner 's services had been terminated and holding that the writ petitioner would be entitled to all consequential benefits.
(2.) THE writ petitioner had been appointed as a Probationary Development Officer with effect from 23rd January, 1992, for a period of nine months. In terms of the appointment letter dated 18th January, 1992, the period of probation could be extended by a period of twelve months but so as not to exceed a total period of twenty four months. As will appear from the materials on record, after the initial period of probation of nine months, the period of probation was extended by a period of twelve months which was to end on 22nd October, 1994. Admittedly, after the expiry of the said period, neither was any letter of termination nor confirmation issued to the writ petitioner and the writ petitioner was allowed to continue to work upto the month of May, 1995 at Chirkunda Branch Office. As will also appear from the materials on record, the writ petitioner was allowed to draw his salary upto the month of May, 1995, when all of a sudden, he was served with a letter dated 21st," March, 1995, informing him that his services stood terminated with effect from 25th October, 1994, since on an appraisal of his performance, it had been found that he had failed to achieve the target given to him.
(3.) THE writ petitioner challenged the said letter of termination of his service in the writ petition mainly on the ground that since he had completed the period of probation and had been allowed to continue beyond the said period, it must be deemed that he stood confirmed after the expiry of the said period. It was also contended that although the Amitabh Choudhary Versus State Of Jharkhand letter of termination was issued some time thereafter, the petitioner was allowed to continue to work and draw his salary right upto the month of May, 1995.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.