https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197368 Where a service rule fixes an initial probation period and a maximum extension period, probation cannot continue indefinitely and, absent an express saving clause, continuation beyond that ceiling ordinarily results in deemed confirmation. The Court applied that principle to Rule 24 of the M.P. Judicial Services Rules, holding that a judicial officer who remained in service beyond the maximum four-year probation period could not still be treated as a probationer. As no order negativing confirmation existed, termination of service without inquiry was unsustainable and the termination order was invalid. en-us Thu, 28 Aug 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Jan 2018 18:59:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197368 Where a service rule fixes an initial probation period and a maximum extension period, probation cannot continue indefinitely and, absent an express saving clause, continuation beyond that ceiling ordinarily results in deemed confirmation. The Court applied that principle to Rule 24 of the M.P. Judicial Services Rules, holding that a judicial officer who remained in service beyond the maximum four-year probation period could not still be treated as a probationer. As no order negativing confirmation existed, termination of service without inquiry was unsustainable and the termination order was invalid. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 28 Aug 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197368