1 WP705.11 Bsb IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J. WRIT PETITION NO. 705 OF 2011 The Clare Road Jesus & Mary Society & anr. ... Petitioners v/s Mrs.Rashmi Tawde & ors. ... Respondents Mr.A.G.Kothari for the petitioner. Mr.Sachin S. Punde for respondent No.1. Mr.J.S.Saluja, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.2 and 3. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR & R. Y. GANOO, JJ. DATED: 3RD AUGUST, 2011 P.C.: 1. This petition takes exception to the order passed by respondent No.2 dated 4.11.2010 which in turn has set aside the termination order passed by the petitioner against respondent No.1. It is not in dispute that the respondent No. 1 at the relevant time was on probation and the termination is a simpliciter termination. Respondent No.2 however has noted that no written memo was issued to respondent No.1 2 WP705.11 by the management at any point of time or forwarded to the Special District Social Welfare Officer who approved the appointment of respondent No.1. Counsel for the petitioner by placing reliance on the decisions of the Supreme Court would contend that the basis on which respondent No.2 has decided the matter is inappropriate. According to him it is well established position that no written memo is required to be given to the employee who is on probation. It is enough for the management to justify the termination order issued against the employee on probation on the argument that it is pure and simple termination order without any adverse implication to the employee concerned. 2. However, in deference to the observation made by the Court in the context of the assessment done by the immediate officer of respondent No.1 employee, the management has agreed to comply with the order passed by respondent No.2 but with liberty to assess the performance of respondent No.1 afresh after allowing her to join on the same post on probation which will be extended for a period of one year from the date of rejoining. In view of the stand taken by the petitioners, we dispose of this petition with liberty to the petitioner to allow respondent No.1 to join on the same post in compliance of the impugned order passed by respondent No.2 and to place respondent No.1 under probation for a period of one year from the date of rejoining 3 WP705.11 and to assess her performance afresh and take appropriate decision, as may be necessary. 2. Writ petition disposed on the above terms. ( R. Y. GANOO, J. ) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.) 4 WP705.11