https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187393 A judicial officer on probation was not deemed confirmed merely because the probationary period expired; confirmation depended on an express order and the prescribed fitness requirements under the service rules. In the absence of such confirmation, the officer continued as a probationer and remained liable to suitability assessment. Applying that principle, the Court held that unsatisfactory performance during the relevant period justified discharge from service, and no charge-sheet or formal enquiry was required while the officer remained on probation. The discharge was therefore valid. en-us Fri, 24 Nov 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Oct 2016 13:07:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187393 A judicial officer on probation was not deemed confirmed merely because the probationary period expired; confirmation depended on an express order and the prescribed fitness requirements under the service rules. In the absence of such confirmation, the officer continued as a probationer and remained liable to suitability assessment. Applying that principle, the Court held that unsatisfactory performance during the relevant period justified discharge from service, and no charge-sheet or formal enquiry was required while the officer remained on probation. The discharge was therefore valid. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 24 Nov 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187393