IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10954 of 2001 SUDARSHAN PANDEY Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 6/ 22-Sep-08 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Petitioner was appointed as Constable on probation on purely temporary basis in the police force of District, Bhojpur. The order of appointment of probationer constables dated 29.11.1986 has been brought on record i.e, Appendix-1 to the counter affidavit. It mentions that the service of probationers may be terminated without prior notice. The other enclosures to the counter affidavit show that petitioner was found to be indisciplined in course of his training and therefore he was not permitted to continue in the training and 2 sent back to the District Headquarters at Bhojpur and on the basis of materials and reports regarding his conduct, his service has been terminated by the impugned order dated 8.11.1988 (Annexure- 2) without any departmental proceeding. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that even a probationer cannot be terminated without a proper proceeding and without complying with the rules of natural justice. The law is well settled that if allegation constituting charges of misconduct is the foundation of an order of termination of a probationer and if the order casts a stigma, he should be subjected to a proceeding and should be given an opportunity to defend himself. But if during probation period the reports indicate that his conduct was not satisfactory, his service may be terminated without any disciplinary 3 proceeding. In the light of materials disclosed in the counter affidavit, this Court finds no illegality in the impugned order whereby petitioner’s service has been dispensed with by the competent authority for reasons disclosed in the counter affidavit. Such termination simpliciter does not cast any stigma. In the facts of the case, the writ petition is found to be without any merit. It is, therefore, dismissed. perwez (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.)