<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2010 (12) TMI 97 - CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201918</link>
    <description>A probationer is not automatically confirmed merely because the initial probation period expires or the rules allow a maximum probation term; absent an express confirmation order, continued service does not create deemed confirmation. The commentary also explains that discharge based on unsatisfactory performance and overall unsuitability during probation remains termination simpliciter where it is not founded on a formal disciplinary enquiry or a finding of misconduct. On that reasoning, the service termination was upheld as a valid probationary discharge and was not treated as punitive or violative of natural justice.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Feb 2011 12:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=175508" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (12) TMI 97 - CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201918</link>
      <description>A probationer is not automatically confirmed merely because the initial probation period expires or the rules allow a maximum probation term; absent an express confirmation order, continued service does not create deemed confirmation. The commentary also explains that discharge based on unsatisfactory performance and overall unsuitability during probation remains termination simpliciter where it is not founded on a formal disciplinary enquiry or a finding of misconduct. On that reasoning, the service termination was upheld as a valid probationary discharge and was not treated as punitive or violative of natural justice.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201918</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>