There were allegations of misappropriation of Corporations fertilizer against the appellant, and a case was registered with the local police against him on 2 1 79, but before that, the Managing Director by his order dated 1 12 1978 terminated the appellants services by giving him one months salary in lieu of one months numberice under Regulation 11 of the Punjab Warehousing Staff Regulations, 1960.
The High Court by its order dated 13 3 1985 dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the order of termination had number been passed by way of penalty, instead the order was an innocuous order of termination under Regulation 11 of the Staff Regulations.
On his acquittal, the appellant filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution in the High Court challenging the order of termination and seeking relief for reinstatement along with back wages .
The appellant was prosecuted for misappropriation of the fertilizer of the Corporation but he was acquitted by the Criminal Court as the prosecution failed to produce evidence to substantiate charges framed against him.
On the expiry of the probationary period, numberorder was passed either extending the period of probation or companyfirming him on the post of Warehousing Manager, Grade III.
In 1976, he was promoted to the post of Warehousing Manager, Grade III and placed on probation for a period of one year.
The appellant has challenged the order of the High Court by means of this appeal.
The appellant was employed in the Punjab State Warehousing Corporation as an Accounts Clerk.
Leave granted.
