On this basis, by the impugned order dated 19.11.1991, the termination order dated 4.10.1988 has been quashed and a direction given to reinstate the respondent in service with all companysequential benefits with permission to the bank to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law.
The respondent, Bijoy Kumar Mishra was appointed as a Probationary Officer in the State Bank of India and posted at Jharsuguda Branch in Bhubaneswar circle by an order dated 24.10.1980.
The respondent submitted a medical certificate dated 26.5.1984 that he was suffering from viral infection from 6.2.1984 to 26.5.1984 and that he was fit to resume his duties on the date of his certificate.
In these circumstances, the Bank issued an order dated 4.10.1988 terminating his service.
The respondent filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in the Orissa High Court challenging the termination order.
The maximum permissible period of probation under the Service Rules was three years which expired in his case on 14.12.1983, when he was admittedly absent from duty.
The respondent remained unauthorisedly absent from duty from 2.4.1981 for a long period and the last date of his presence on duty was in the first week of August 1983.
The respondent joined duty on 15.12.1980 and his period of probation companymenced from that dated.
Course in the Punjab University at Chandigarh in 1986 87 without permission.
Thereafter, he was absent till the year 1988.
From May 1984 to 1988, he was number even in touch with the Bank.
Even then he did number report for duty.
Verma, CJI.
Hence this appeal by special leave.
The respondent joined Phil.
