Tribunal quashes UT order for extending teachers' probation for indefinite period
The Chandigarh Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal has quashed an order of the UT Administration passed in 2017 for extending the probation period of teachers appointed in 2015 for an indefinite period. It has directed the Administration to regularise
the services of these teachers and release the consequential benefits with regard to the extended probation period.
Twentysix teachers, in an application filed before the tribunal through advocate Rohit Seth, had stated that the Chandigarh Administration issued advertisements for recruitment of TGT and JBT teachers 10 years ago. A written test was conducted in the February, 2015. After qualifying the test, they were given appointments on the posts of JBT/TGT teachers starting August, 2015, with a probation period two years at fixed monthly emoluments without any other benefits, including increments etc.
They said in July, 2016, allegations surfaced that the examination papers might have been leaked and it was recommended that an FIR be registered. A Special Investigation Team (SIT) was formed by the Chandigarh Administration to look into the alleged allegations.
The SIT filed a chargesheet in the matter without naming the applicants.
They said despite the fact that they had been working to the best of their abilities and had at no stage been called by any investigating agency or SIT with regard to their appointments, the respondents passed the impugned order dated July 12, 2017. Through the order, they were intimated that their period of probation has been indefinitely extended and it will not be cleared until the final outcome of the case.
The applicants contended that Administration’s action was in contravention of the Punjab Civil Services Rules 1994.
They pleaded that it was a settled law that the probation period can only be extended if there is any misconduct/inefficiency or incompetency on the part of employees, which is not the case here.
Meanwhile, the respondents justified the decision, saying that the matter of many candidates whose services were terminated was pending adjudication before the Supreme Court.
After hearing of the arguments, the tribunal quashed the order dated July 12, .2017, holding it to be illegal being contrary to the rules. It said the respondents are directed to do the needful to regularise the services of the applicants and to release them the consequential benefits with regard to the extended probation period. However, the order passed by the respondents shall be subject to the outcome of the pending SLP filed by the respondents before the Supreme Court in the matter.
