Probationary period

2025 PLC(CS) 1090 ISLAMABAD Judicial Precedent

Probationary periodRight(s)of probationerScopeOpportunity of hearing, non-affording ofTermination of a probationerScopePetitioner who was appointed in BPS-21 in University was aggrieved of his termination by the University

Contention of the petitioner was that neither the opportunity of personal hearing was afforded nor any show-cause notice was issued

Validity

Upon a perusal of the appointment letter of the petitioner, it becomes manifest that he was traversing his probationary period at University and one of the clauses of the said letter unequivocally mentions the condition that his services could be brought to an end without ascription of reasons or issuance of notice, should his performance or conduct be found unsatisfactory during this period

Thus, the petitioner's termination occurred while he was in the probationary phase

Probation is a process of testing or observing the character or abilities of a person who is new to a role or job

The very purpose of the probationary period is to assess the performance of an employee during a specified period in which the services of the employee remain purely temporary

University /Respondent has acted in conformity with the terms enunciated in the appointment letter, a document containing terms that were acquiesced to by the petitioner at the time of joining

In cases of civil servant, there exists no right during the probationary period to claim protection under the maxim "audi alteram partem" for issuance of a show-cause notice before any termination can take effect, as it is against the spirit and true meaningof putting an employee on probation

A probationer has not vested right to continue in service, therefore, his service can be terminated without a show-cause notice and the question of violation of the principle of audi alteram partem does not arise except in case of mala fides

Impugned order cannot be termed as mala fide by any standard

Simpliciter termination during the probationary period does not require show cause notice or any other legal formality and simpliciter termination order during the period of probation would be unexceptional-able and unquestionable

Petitioner failed to pinpoint any illegality in the impugned notification

Constitutional petition, being merit-less, was dismissed, in circumstances.

2017 PLC(CS) 1080 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

Probationary period

Even in cases of civil servants there existed no right during probationary period to claim protection under maxim "audi alteram partem" for issuance of show cause notice before any termination could took effect as it was against spirit and true meaning of putting an employee on "probation."

2016 PLC(CS) 430 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

S. 42Suit for declarationEmployee of companyProbationary periodGratuity, calculation ofCriteriaEligible serviceScope

Defendant-Company calculated gratuity on the basis of basic salary of the plaintiff-employee on the ground that his service was below 15 years of length

Contention of employee was that he was entitled to be given the gratuity on the basis of gross salary and not on the basic salary as he had served for more than 15 years in the company

Validity

Any period of service with the employer on probation subject to condition that employee was confirmed in employer's service would be included in eligible service

Employee remained in service without any break including the probationary period for a period of more than 15 years

Crucial issue was as to whether the period of probation was to be considered for claim of gratuity or not

Employee was not only a permanent employee but also was a member of the fund of the company

Once an employee had become a member, his period of probation/training would be included towards his eligible service

Eligible service would include at the end of probation if the employee was confirmed

Entire period of service of plaintiff-employee would fall within the definition of term 'eligible service'

Employee's probationary period could be considered as service under the rules of company

Plaintiff-employee had become a member of the Trust which did not impose any embargo or put any discrimination with regard to the permanent employee or otherwise

Probationary period of the plaintiff-employee under the given circumstances could be counted for calculating the gratuity

Plaintiff-employee had been made a member and he was entitled for the benefit of gratuity

Company was bound to pay the due gratuity as per terms and conditions mentioned in the Trust Deed to its employees

Rules of company were subservient to the Trust Deed

If there was controversy between the Trust Deed and the Rules, the Deed had to be given preference over the Rules

Employee was entitled to be paid gratuity which was to be calculated on gross salary basis

Revision was partly accepted, in circumstances.