Integrity and credibility

2015 PLC(CS) 389 PUNJAB-SUBORDINATE-JUDICIAL-SERVICE-TRIBUNAL Judicial Precedent

S. 10Punjab Subordinate Judiciary Service Tribunal Act (XII of 1991), S.5Termination of serviceJudicial officerSpecial reports with regard to the integrity of Civil JudgeDepartmental appeal, filing ofModeProbation periodPerformance being below averageIntegrity and credibilityScopeService of appellant was terminated on the basis of special reports that she did not enjoy good reputation

Contention of appellant was that she submitted her departmental appeal through ordinary mail but Authority had not acknowledged receipt of the same with mala fide intention; that there was no specific mode for filing departmental appeal and that special reports contained serious allegations which had stigmatized the appellant and without conducting regular inquiry services of the appellant could not be terminated

Validity

Nothing was on record to show that departmental appeal was sent by the appellant through ordinary mail and same had been received in the office of Authority

Appointment of the appellant had to be considered with effect from the date she assumed charge of the post

Appellant assumed charge of the post on 17-11-2008 and remained on probation for a period of four years as per condition No.4 of the appointment notification

Probation period of the appellant had to expire on 16-11-2012 but prior to that her services were terminated on 15-11-2012

Appellant had not attained the status of a confirmed/regular employee and her services could be terminated without notice and without assigning any reason

No notice was required to be issued to the appellant during probation period before issuing impugned notification

Authority had rightly terminated services of the appellant and had not committed any illegality while issuing the impugned notification

Service of the appellant remained under clouds right from her induction

Performance of the appellant was below average who cleared departmental examination in four attempts

Integrity of the appellant was also questioned in two ACRs and her conduct was not found satisfactory

Appellant did not enjoy good reputation and she was involved in malpractices

Impugned notification was a termination simpliciter and appellant had not been stigmatized in any manner whatsoever

Nothing was on record to suggest any mala fide or colourable exercise of powers by the Authority in terminating services of the appellant

Sufficient reasons existed to pass termination order against the appellant

Appeal was dismissed in circumstances.