https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218475 Service rules governing probationary discharge were read harmoniously: Rule 8(3) allowed discharge during probation without reasons, but Rule 9(2) specifically required one month's notice for a judicial member directly appointed from the Bar unless confirmed. The specific notice requirement was treated as operative for that category of direct recruit, and the absence of the prescribed notice made the discharge unsustainable. The interpretative approach also favoured the employee where doubt existed in the service rules, so the termination was invalid for non-compliance with the mandatory notice condition. en-us Fri, 27 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Nov 2012 17:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218475 Service rules governing probationary discharge were read harmoniously: Rule 8(3) allowed discharge during probation without reasons, but Rule 9(2) specifically required one month's notice for a judicial member directly appointed from the Bar unless confirmed. The specific notice requirement was treated as operative for that category of direct recruit, and the absence of the prescribed notice made the discharge unsustainable. The interpretative approach also favoured the employee where doubt existed in the service rules, so the termination was invalid for non-compliance with the mandatory notice condition. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 27 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218475