1985 (1) TMI 334

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt continued in service and no order was made confirming his appointment. On March 31, 1975 the appellant's services were terminated. 3. Aggrieved by the termination of his services, the appellant filed a writ petition in the High Court of Gujarat, but by his judgment and order dated April 21, 1976 a learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition. An appeal was filed by the appellant, and an Appellate Bench of the High Court dismissed the appeal by its judgment and order dated March 28, 1977. 4. Three points have been raised before us in this appeal. The first contention is that the order terminating the appellant's services was passed mala fide, the second is that on the expiry of the period of probation the appellant must be....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pany who, according to the appellant, enjoyed political favour and influence with the authorities. The allegation has been denied in the counter-affidavit. During the hearing of the special leave petition this Court directed the State Government to file a specific affidavit relating to the facts alleged in the writ petition regarding a confidential enquiry initiated by the Government. The affidavit filed in reply admits that an enquiry was initiated against the appellant on the complaint of the said assessee, but it maintains that there was no mala fides on the part of the Ministers concerned and that a perusal of the record relating to that enquiry shows that the allegation of mala fides is wholly baseless. We have considered the matter ca....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....period of probation. The argument suffers from a fallacy. The power to extend the period of probation must not be confused with the manner in which the extension may be effected. The one relates to power, the other to mere procedure. Merely because procedural rules have not been framed does not imply a negation of the power. In the absence of such rules, it is sufficient that the power is exercised fairly and reasonably, having regard to the context in which the power has been granted.' 8. It is then submitted that the appellant enjoyed a legitimate expectation of being confirmed on the expiry of two years of probation and on successfully completing the qualifying tests and training undergone by him. We are not impressed by that conte....