1 2025:CGHC:2998-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 17 of 2025 1 - Umesh Kumar Badoniya S/o L.D. Badoniya, Aged About 48 Years, Presently working on the post of Assistant Grade-3 At Govt. Industrial Training Institute Rajnandgaon District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh, through The Secretary, Department of Skill Development, Technical Education and Employment, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Director, Employment and Training, Indravati Bhavan, 1st Floor Block-4 Atal Nagar Naya Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 3 - The Principal Government Industrial Training Institute, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Ajay Thakre, Advocate. For State-Respondents : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 17-01-2025 1. The present writ appeal has been filed by the petitioner/appellant against the impugned order dated 04-12- Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD AADIL KHAN 2 2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPS No.3157/2021 whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner has been dismissed. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Assistant grade III under the Industrial Training Institute Rajnandgaon/Respondent No.3 vide order dated 20-04-2010 on probation of two years. On 25-11-2017 the petitioner was promoted on the post of Assistant Grade-II, but later on his promotion order was stayed vide order dated 27-11- 2017 and subsequently, it was cancelled vide order dated 11- 01-2018. Thereafter, the petitioner had challenged the said order dated 11-01-2018 by filing the writ petition before this Court. After hearing the parties, the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner by holding that as the services of the petitioner was not confirmed and he was on probation, therefore, the respondent authorities rightly cancelled the order of promotion. The order passed by the learned Single Judge is under challenge in the present writ appeal. 3. Learned counsel for the writ appellant would submit that initial appointment of the petitioner was on 20-04-2010 on probation for two years from the date of his appointment. After successful completion of two years, his services are deemed to be confirmed, even if no formal order of confirmation was issued by 3 the department. Considering the services of the petitioner confirmed the department has issued his promotion order on 25-11-2017 on the post of Assistant Grade-II, but without giving any opportunity to the petitioner the same was canceled vide order dated 11-01-2018. The benefit extended to the petitioner cannot be taken back. There is no adverse remark against the petitioner during his probation period and thus, the impugned order passed by the learned Single Jude is erroneous and is liable to be set aside. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the State supported the impugned order. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents annexed with the writ petition as well as the writ appeal. 6. From perusal of the appointment order (Annexure A/1) it reflects that the condition was imposed upon the petitioner that he is required to submit one year diploma certificate passed and experience certificate of 10000 depression hour within three years, it is also condition that failing which his services can be terminated at any time without there being any formal order. It was further condition that the petitioner is also required to submit Hindi typing pass certificate from any recognized Board within maximum period of two years and only after one year of submitting the said certificate he is entitled for his increment. It is further revealed from document Annexure A/2 that his service 4 records were called by the Deputy Director for consideration of his service during probation period and later has been issued by the office of the Deputy Director, Employment and Training C.G. on 17-06-2016. On 24-06-2016 the petitioner made request for exemption from submission of Hindi typing pass certificate as he already crossed age of 40 years. 7. Be that it may, the petitioner’s services were not confirmed upto to 24-06-2016 when he made request to the authorities. Although his name was reflected in the list of candidates who have been granted promotion on the post of Assistant Grade-II and his name reflects at Serial No.29 of the said list dated 25- 11-2017, but immediately after issuance of the promotion list when the authority concerned came into knowledge that the probation period of the petitioner is not over, he immediately stayed the promotion order of the petitioner vide its order dated 27-11-2017 and after examining the service record of the petitioner his promotion order was cancelled on 11-01-2018. In that condition the petitioner cannot claim that his services was confirmed by the lapse of two years automatically and he deemed to be a confirmed employee with the department. After considering the material produced before the learned Single Judge the writ petition of the petitioner was dismissed and we also in agreement with the finding recorded by the learned Single Judge in the impugned order. 8. Upon perusing the impugned order, we notice that the same has 5 been rendered by the learned Single Judge with cogent and justifiable reasons. In an intra-court appeal, no interference is usually warranted unless palpable infirmities are noticed. Learned Single Judge while passing the impugned order has adverted to all the facts of the case. We do not find any fault in the impugned order. 9. Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Aadil