Law Insider India

Legal News, Current Trends and Legal Insight | Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Gujarat HC: Probation Period Cannot be Extended Beyond 2 Years after The Employee Deemed

2 min read
Gujarat High Court Law insider

Paridhi Arya

Published on: April 9, 2022 at 19:59 IST

Gujarat High Court ordered the State Government to reinstate the Officials who was put on Probation since eight years.

The Court made it clear that Probation Period (the period in which newly recruited person is put on Trial) cannot be beyond two years.

Chintan Vaishanv, who was a Government Official appointed for the Post of Mamlatdar (person who is head of Revenue Administration) filed a Petition against his termination. He was terminated on March 2, 2019.

As per the Rule 10(A) of Gujarat Civil Service Classification and Recruitment (General) Rules, 1967 and Amended in 1994 the person whose Probation Period is extended for more than two years will be assumed confirmed.

“A bare reading of the above-referred rule makes it abundantly clear that the Probation Period can be extended for a maximum period of two years beyond which probation cannot be extended,” the Court stated in the Order.

“The Respondents are directed to reinstate the Petitioner in service forthwith on the post on which he was working prior to the Order of Termination. The Petitioner is deemed to have continued in service and shall be entitled to all consequential benefits. The Respondents are directed to reinstate the Petitioner and give all consequential benefits within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this Judgment,” said by the High Court.

In his Tenure of Work two Charge-sheets were filed against him in one of them, the Disciplinary Action taken against him, was to stop his increments but Counsel representing the Petitioner cleared that he was not getting any increment so this penalty was stand irrelevant.

“As far as the Second Charge is concerned since the Petitioner was already exonerated, it was never implemented and, therefore, these grounds cannot be taken as Grounds for Termination,” the Lawyer Hriday Buch representing the Petitioner told the Court.

The decision of the High Court Bench was that the Termination of Petitioner on March 2, 2019 is bad as he will be Deemed confirmed employee whose Termination Period is finished.

Also Read: SC: Disciplinary Proceedings should not be Initiated Against a Judicial Officer merely on the basis of a Wrong Order