<?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>2005 (11) TMI 504 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193607</link>
    <description>Service regulations requiring an express order of confirmation do not create deemed confirmation merely because the maximum probation period expires; where the rules also provide that probation continues until confirmation or termination, harmonious construction prevents automatic confirmation. A termination preceded by a show cause notice is not punitive or stigmatic by itself; it becomes punitive only if the order itself records a penal finding or casts stigma. On these principles, the employee was not treated as confirmed on expiry of probation, and the termination was held to be simpliciter, so no interference with dismissal of the writ petition was warranted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2017 10:50:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=484985" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (11) TMI 504 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193607</link>
      <description>Service regulations requiring an express order of confirmation do not create deemed confirmation merely because the maximum probation period expires; where the rules also provide that probation continues until confirmation or termination, harmonious construction prevents automatic confirmation. A termination preceded by a show cause notice is not punitive or stigmatic by itself; it becomes punitive only if the order itself records a penal finding or casts stigma. On these principles, the employee was not treated as confirmed on expiry of probation, and the termination was held to be simpliciter, so no interference with dismissal of the writ petition was warranted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193607</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>