Denying Extension Of Probation To Few Employees Is Discriminatory If Government Has Granted The Said Benefit To Others: Madras HC

Finding that the Government under similar circumstances had extended the probation period of the government servants by invoking Rule 12 (A) and 26 (b) of the Rules in pari-materia to the relevant provision of the Tamil Nadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016, the Madras High Court held that when a batch of government employees have been extended the benefits of extension of probation over four years to enable them to pass the required Second-Class Language (Full) Test, then denying the same benefits to the petitioner would be discriminatory.

The High Court held so while considering a petition seeking to quash the G.O. Ms No.67 dated May 24, 2022, issued by the State of Tamil Nadu (first respondent) and the consequential proceedings issued by the Commissioner, Department of Economics and Statistics (second respondent), and reinstatement of petitioner in service as well as direction to the first and second respondents to extend the period of probation as available under Section 33 and 31(4) of the Tamil Nadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016.

A Single Judge Bench of Justice M.S Ramesh observed that “when the petitioner had subsequently participated in the Second-Class Language (Full) Test written examination on 11.06.2022 and completed the same, within five years from 28.02.2018, this Court is of the view that the impugned order dated 26.05.2022 discharging him from services, is discriminatory”.

Senior Advocate V. Prakash appeared for the Petitioner, whereas GA S. Prabhakaran appeared for the Respondent.

The brief facts of the case were that the petitioner was successfully selected for the post of Assistant Director in the competitive examinations conducted by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission (TNPSC) for the vacancies during the year 2000-2014. He was appointed and initially posted in the Department of Economics and Statistics, Chennai on probation. While on deputation in the Commercial Taxes Department, Chennai, an order was issued, discharging the petitioner from his services because he did not pass the Second-Class Language (Full) Test, within two years. As per the order, the first respondent had claimed that there is no provision for extension of probation to cases where the Government servants have failed to acquire the linguistic qualification. Challenging the orders of the first and second respondents, the petitioner approached the High Court.

After considering the submission, the bench found that during the pendency of the present petition, the petitioner was permitted to attend the Tamil Test, wherein after participation, the petitioner had successfully passed the Second-Class Language (Full) Test.

“Under Section 33(2) of the Tamil Nadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016, the Appointing Authority may extend the probation period of a probationer falling under Section 31 or 32, to enable him to acquire the special qualifications or pass the prescribed tests to enable him to decide whether the probationer is suitable for full membership or not. Section 31(1)(ii) of the Act empowers the Appointing Authority at its discretion, to extend the period of probation of the probationer or terminate his probation or discharge him from his service, after giving him reasonable opportunities by showing cause for his discharge. Sub-section 31(4) prescribes a maximum period of five years up to which the Government servants' probation shall be extended and in cases of those who do not acquire the said qualification within a maximum period of five years, his probation shall be terminated”, noted the Bench.

The High Court observed that though Section 31(4) provides for an extension of probation of a Government Servant to a maximum period of five years, the petitioner was discharged from service within five years.

The High Court further observed that in view of Section 31(1)(ii), 31(4) and Section 32 of the Act, the requirement of passing the departmental tests and language test within the probation period of two years, is only directory in nature and not mandatory, since the statute empowers the Appointing Authority to extend the probation period to a maximum period of five years, to enable the Government Servant to successfully complete such tests.

However, such a probationer may not be entitled to seek further extension of probation after the maximum period of five years as prescribed under Section 31(4) of the Act, added the Court.

Consequently, the Bench quashed the government order and directed the respondents to pass appropriate orders to reinstate the petitioner back into service, together with continuity of service and all other attendant benefits.

Cause Title: Smruti Ranjan Pradhan v. State of Tamil Nadu and Anr.

Click here to read/download the Order