M VENUGOPAL Vs. DIVISIONAL MANAGER LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA MACHILIPATNAM A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed against the judgment of the High Court, dismissing the writ application filed on behalf of the appellant for quashing the order of termination of his services, during the period of probation.

(2.) The appellant was appointed as Development Officer by the respondent. Life Insurance Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "the Corporation"), on probation for a period of one year from 23-5-1984 to 22-5-1985. The period of probation of the appellant was extended for a further period of one year from 23-5-1985 to 22-5-1986. Clauses 3 to 6 of the order of appointment deal with the code of conduct to be followed : clauses 6 to 9 deal with tours, advance deposits, record of work and collection of premiums; clause 10 deals with the minimum business that the appellant was expected to do during the period specified, clause 11 deals with confirmation and is as follows :-

(3.) As the appellant was required to do a minimum business mentioned in the order and as he failed to achieve the target so fixed, the Divisional Manager of the Corporation, by a communication dated 1-2-1986, advised the appellant to comply with the said term during the extended period of probation. Yet another communication was issued to the appellant on 5-4-1986, saying that he had failed to fulfil the norm prescribed to earn confirmation. He was asked to improve his performance, failing which his service was likely to be terminated. Before the expiry of the extended period of probation the service of the appellant was terminated on 9-6-1986.