IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA --- CWJC No.10866 of 2007 --- KRISHNA KANT SINGH SON OF SHRI CHANDRIKA SINGH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE + P.O. SANTHI – VIA – KUSHWA, P.S. RAGHUNATHPUR, DISTRICT – SIWAN (BIHAR) -Versus- 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF SHIPPING AND TRANSPORT, DEPARTMENT OF LIGHT HOUSE AND LIGHT-SHIPS, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI – 110001, 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF LIGHT HOUSES AND LIGHT-SHIPS, MINISTRY OF SURFACE TRANSPORT, EAST BLOCK – X, LEVEL NO.4, R.K. PURAM, NEW DELHI – 110066, 3. THE DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF LIGHT HOUSES AND LIGHT-SHIPS, MINISTRY OF SURFACE TRANSPORT, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MADRAS – 6000011 4. THE DIRECTOR (REGIONAL) OF LIGHT HOUSES AND LIGHT-SHIPS, MINISTRY OF SURFACE TRANSPORT, DEEP BHAWAN, POST NEHRU MARG, JAM NAGAR (GUJRAT) – 361008. ----------- For the petitioner: Mr. B.J. Jha, Advocate For the respondents : Mr. Sahvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate --- P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice And Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal --- Dated, the 24th September, 2008 We heard the counsel for the petitioner and perused the order of the Tribunal and other relevant material. Inter alia, the term of appointment, whereby the petitioner was appointed to the post of Assistant Light Keeper provides thus: “2(c) The appointment may be terminated after the period of probation by a month notice given either side viz., the appointee or the appointing authority without assigning any reasons therefor. The appointing authority 2 however, reserves the right of terminating the service of the appointee forthwith or before the expiration of the period of notice by making payment to him a sum equivalent to the pay and allowances for the period of notice or unexpired portion thereof.” 2. In the light of the aforesaid clause, the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that on expiry of probation period, the petitioner acquired permanent status is misconceived. 3. Consideration of the matter by the Tribunal does not suffer from any legal flaw. 4. Writ petition does not deserve to be admitted. It is dismissed in limine. R. M. Lodha, CJ. Kishore K. Mandal, J. Neyaz/