JUDGMENT 1. CHALLENGING the judgment and order dated 13th May, 2004 passed by learned trial Judge in W. P. No. 127 (W) of 2004, this appeal has been preferred by the respondent nos. 7 to 10, 12 to 14, 17 and 18 of the writ application, except respondent no. 7 of the writ application, who are members of the governing Body of Kanchrapara College. From the memo of appeal, it appears that three other members of the Governing Body, namely, respondent nos. 15, 16 and 19 of the writ application have been made as parties under the heading 'proforma respondent nos. 7, 8 and 9 of the appeal'. 2. BY the impugned judgment under appeal, learned trial Judge quashed the resolution dated 6th May, 2003 passed by the Governing Body of kanchrapara College, hereinafter referred to for brevity as 'said College', whereby a decision was passed discharging the service of writ petitioner, the Principal of the College, whose appointment was on probation on the ground of unsatisfactory service by taking as many as twenty grounds to identify the dissatisfaction of the Governing Body about the working of the writ petitioner as principal, in the said College. By the said resolution it was further decided not to extend the probationary period of further one-year. The decision was given effect to from the very evening of the said date i. e. 6th May, 2003. The writ petitioner while working in the post of Lecturer of a College appeared before the College Service Commission and ultimately being duly recommended by said Service Commission was appointed in the post of Principal of the said College, a College affiliated by the University of Kalyani on 7th May, 2002 as probationer. The service of the writ petitioner was under control of the west Bengal College Teachers (Security of Service) Act, 1975, hereinafter referred to as the 'said Act', whereby under Section 5, the probationary period and its consequential factors have been stipulated, which reads such: '5. Probation.- (1) A teacher appointed against a permanent vacancy shall be on probation ordinarily for a period of one year from the date of such appointment and such period of probation may at the discretion of the Governing Body be extended for a further period not exceeding one year. Probation.- (1) A teacher appointed against a permanent vacancy shall be on probation ordinarily for a period of one year from the date of such appointment and such period of probation may at the discretion of the Governing Body be extended for a further period not exceeding one year. (2) If at any time during the period of probation the probationer's work is not considered satisfactory, the probationer shall be discharged by the Governing Body. (3) On satisfactory completion of the period of probation, a teacher shall be confirmed with effect from the date of his appointment on probation by an order in writing made by the Governing Body and the fact of such confirmation shall be communicated to such teacher: provided that if on completion of the period of probation of a teacher no such order of confirmation is passed and communicated within a period of two months of the completion of the period of probation, the teacher shall be deemed to have been confirmed with effect from the date of his appointment on probation. ' 3. ELEVEN members of the Governing Body of said College sat in a meeting on 6th May, 2003 to consider the agenda being item no. VII, which reads such: 'to consider the confirmation of Service of Dr. Sunil Kumar khan as Principal of this College on completion of his One Year Service in this College. ' 4. THE teacher's representative and the representative from the Student union, namely, Sri Chhabi Sengupta and Sri Netai Ghosh, who are respondent no. 15 and 19 respectively of this appeal opposed the decision of discharge from service but by majority decision, service of the petitioner was discharged on recording the grounds of dissatisfaction being total twenty grounds, which read such: '1]. Dr. Khan miserably failed to take initiative till in date in the matter of arranging a room allotted for B. Sc. Computer (Gen and Hons)course proposed to be introduced from the next academic session i. e. 2003-2004 though Rs. 50000/-were provisionally sanction by the 4th g. B. of the college during dated 04. 02. 2003. 2]. Classes and the examination process have been badly hampered for his whimsical attitude and attendant failure in regard to placing orders for 100 benches though quotations were collected for the purpose in accordance with a G. B. resolution approving the purchase of 100 benches in its meeting dated 16. 11. 02. 2003. 2]. Classes and the examination process have been badly hampered for his whimsical attitude and attendant failure in regard to placing orders for 100 benches though quotations were collected for the purpose in accordance with a G. B. resolution approving the purchase of 100 benches in its meeting dated 16. 11. 2002 and sanctioning fund for the purpose. 3]. Dr. Khan abstained from a very important meeting of the service Book Sub-Committee dated 07. 10. 2002 being himself the convenor of the meeting and it badly reflects his lack of accountability towards the college and its employees. 4]. It was reported that Dr. Khan carried without knowledge and consent of the appropriate college authority a lot of important files including G. B. munites Books and files for reasons not known to any body and nobody knows whether the files and other important documents and papers were safely returned to the college. 5]. It is quite unbecoming for Dr. Khan M. Sc. Ph. D, in Botany that he did not take a single class in his subject basically being a teacher and the Principal of the College during his one-year tenure as the Principal on probation. 6]. Whereas in B. A. History Honours introduced from the academic session 2002-2003 on self financing basis, a full time teacher is required to take 21 classes week the existing class ' Routine offers him only 7 classes a week to take. Despite repeated requests and urge from concerned teachers of the History department and teachers belonging to her departments for framing a full fledged scientific routine in accordance with a circular from the West Bengal Council of Higher education he could not surprisingly take any positive step in this regard till date. Over and above, most surprisingly the sum of Rs. 25,000/sanctioned by the G. B. in its meeting dt. 16. 11. 2002 for purchase of books of History Hons. has not released till date leading to growing resentment among concerned teachers. 7]. Though the intake capacity in regard to admission of students in B. A. /b. Sc. /b. Com. General and Honours streams has been fixed by the University Dr. Khan has to be squarely blamed for admission of students during the academic session 2002-2003 far beyond intake capacity in different hons. subjects and general course at the undergraduate level and specially for gross anomaly in admission in b. Sc. /b. Com. General and Honours streams has been fixed by the University Dr. Khan has to be squarely blamed for admission of students during the academic session 2002-2003 far beyond intake capacity in different hons. subjects and general course at the undergraduate level and specially for gross anomaly in admission in b. Sc. Zoology Hons. course through admission of two students/in zoology Hons. with lower marks superseding those with higher marks leading to unprecedented students agitation and boycott of classes by the students followed by near halt of the academic progress of the institution. 8]. It is a matter of shame for the institution and a gross violation of the G. . noms when Dr. Khan, the probationer Principal of kanchrapara College did neither report to G. B. nor got the fact approved by G. B. in its meeting that he had admitted students far beyond the intake capacity fixed by the University of Kalyani. Incidentally all this was done in blatant violation of the decision taken in the G. B. meeting dated 2. 09. 2002 and subsequently confirmed in another G. B. Meeting dt. 27. 11. 2002. All this amply proves that he was tended to tamper with g. B. resolution adopted in G. B. meeting were found to differ to with those taken up for confirmation in the immediately next G. B. Meeting. 9]. Post Graduate teaching in Hindu suffered a lost and concerned students badly missed classes in P. G. Hindi course introduced from the academic session 2002-2003 followed by a large portion of the syllabus remaining unfinished as Dr. Khan practically did nothing in six month period to arrange recruitment of guest lecturers in Hindi. 10]. During the tenure of Prof. J. N. Chakraborty as the teacher-in-Charge of the college w. e. f. 01. 02. 2002 to 06. 05. 2002 it was decided that the college would introduce N. S. S. and a letter was sent to the effect to programme co-ordinator Kalyani University. Suggestion of appointing Sri Subhabrata De, lecturer in Commerce Kanchrapara college as the Programme Officer for the College N. S. S. unit was approved by the University and a sum of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand Only) was sent by the programme co-ordinator with instructions towards execution of specific programmes to be completed immediately. Furthermore, it was resolved in the G. B. meeting dated 04. 02. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand Only) was sent by the programme co-ordinator with instructions towards execution of specific programmes to be completed immediately. Furthermore, it was resolved in the G. B. meeting dated 04. 02. 2002 that a separate account be opened for N. S. S. Unit of the college. Neither this decision has been translated into action nor Sri subhabrata De has been issued an official letter of appointment by Dr. Khan till date. As a result the N. S. S. scheme introduced in the college is on the verge of being frustrated after the University issued a letter asking for utilization of the money and reports of programmes that had to be completed by April, 2003. 11]. In reference to H. S. Course being withdrawn from the college a letter from the D. P. I. Education Directorate Government of west Bengal was being sent during the tenure of Dr. Khan as probationer principal urging the college Authority to distribute the H. S. Books in the college library among the neighbouring H. S. Schools. Though a resolution to the effect was adopted in the G. B. Meeting dated 27. 11. 2002 neither the books have been dispensed with nor any initiative has been taken to the effect till date. 12]. In reply to Prof. J. N. Chakraborty's letter issued to WBSEB for arranging Electricity connection the new building of the college during his tenure as the Teacher-in-Charge, WBSEB asked the college authority to deposit a certain amount of money. The matter was neither discussed in the G. B. meeting nor any initiative has been taken in this regard till date and the stipulated date for deposit of the money has expired during one year tenure of Dr. S. K. Khan as the Principal of the college on probation. 13]. Dr. Khan is reported to have taken remuneration for invigilation along with remuneration as the Centre-in-Charge although he acted only as the centre-in-charge of B. A. /b. Sc. /b. Com, Part-I general. 14]. Dr. S. K. Khan practically did nothing except signing on bunches of papers painstakingly prepared within a stipulate six day period by a Group of teachers of the college as development proposal for financial Assistance from the U. G. C. during the Xth plan period. This very much reflects the negative outlook of Dr. Khan in regard to development aspects of the college. This very much reflects the negative outlook of Dr. Khan in regard to development aspects of the college. It is furthermore strengthened by the fact that he got trucks of earch unloaded on the proposed science building site of the college without any specific purpose and without the approval of the Governing Body. 15]. Dr. Khan markedly lacks the ability to motivate members of the college family to stand united and contributed positively to the academic prosperity of the college and as such he should not be allowed any more to continue in office as the Principal of the college. 16]. It is reported that a Bookseller Co., Dasgupta and Co. Pvt. Ltd. by name issued a cheque dated 24. 3. 2003 (A/c No. 571384) worth rs. 500/- only in the name of Sk. Khan allegedly against an advertisement in the souvenir published on the occasion of the 4th annual Conference of all Bengal Principals Association KU Committee organized by the College on 21st September, 2002 and it inevitably raise a question as to the propriety of collection of money only in a person's name and did not in the name of the organisor of the conference. It also propts the college authorities to think it fit to detect if money were collected in terms of cheques issued in S. K. Khan name particularly when the conference is concerned and surprisingly enough when Sri subhabrata De, a lecturer in commerce and Treasurer of the organizing committee had to be informed by way of a statements about the incomes and expenditures which has not been submitted by Dr. Khan to Prof. De till date. 17]. Dr. Khan is found to be guilty of abuse of power by putting on duty mark in the attendance register at random without submitting supportive documents and without approval by the President of the governing Body. 18]. On the occasion of the inauguration of the P. G. Course in hindi on 09. 10. 2002 Dr. Khan single handedly chalked out a programme which started with the Swarswati Vandana to the extreme displeasure of the University official and other guests. Dr. Biswanath roy Chowdhury Secretary WBCUTA North 24-Parganas Dist. Committee left the function in protest Different Circle condemned Dr. Khan's shameful act and he was very much responsible for embarssing the college authority and lowering the prestige of the Institution. 19]. Dr. Biswanath roy Chowdhury Secretary WBCUTA North 24-Parganas Dist. Committee left the function in protest Different Circle condemned Dr. Khan's shameful act and he was very much responsible for embarssing the college authority and lowering the prestige of the Institution. 19]. Kanchrapara College submitted an abstract the of cost of two parts Rs. 20,00,000. 00 (Twenty Lakh only) and Rs. 21,00,000. 00 (Twenty One lakh only) respectively against project of construction of a new building and the plan was sanctioned by the Chief Engineer PWD. As a result the department of Higher Education Government of West bengal released a total of Rs. 20,00,000. 00 in the first phase including the college share of 25% of the amount Dr. Khan miserably failed during his one year tenure as probationer principal to produce the final utilization certificate till date and get the remaining Rs. 21,00,000. 00/-released though the college share for the amount to be released in the second phase has been spent by the college. 20]. Although Dr. Mrs. Anima Kumar (Konar) reader in philosophy retire on 31. 01. 2002, Dr. Khan failed to submit requisition in proper manner to the West Bengal College Service Commissioner till date for sending a teacher in philosophy against the vacant post. ' On the basis of the said grounds following decision was recorded: 'in the light of the above observations all the Hon'ble Members of the Governing Body present in the meeting were unanimous as to disapproving confirmation to the Principal during his probation in the course of one year except the following two. Sri Netai Ghosh, Secretary of the Students Union Kanchrapara college and students representatives to the Governing Body note his dissent as to the rejection of confirmation of the principal and demanded extension of his probation period. Sri Chhabi Sengupta Teachers representatives to the governing Body expressed his dissatisfaction over unsatisfactory service rendered by Dr. Khan to the college but wished that his probation period might be extended. Under the circumstances considering majority decision in favour of declining confirmation of the probationer lorincipas resolved with reference to Item No. (VII) of the Agenda that after evaluation of one year service of Dr. Sunil Kumar Khan w. e. f. 07. 05. Khan to the college but wished that his probation period might be extended. Under the circumstances considering majority decision in favour of declining confirmation of the probationer lorincipas resolved with reference to Item No. (VII) of the Agenda that after evaluation of one year service of Dr. Sunil Kumar Khan w. e. f. 07. 05. 2002 as probationer principal of Kanchrapara College it is being considered unsatisfactory and his probation period cannot be extended and therefore he is discharged from the Post of Principal with immediate effect i. e. from 06. 05. 2003 evening under Sub-section (2) of section (5) of the West bengal College Teachers (Security) of Service Act, 1975. ' 5. THE said decision was challenged in the writ application on twofold grounds, namely, (1) the President of the Governing Body, Sri J. C. Das was not qualified to be the member of the Governing Body as the University Statutes prescribed a minimum academic qualification, which admittedly Sri Das did not posses; (2) that the termination of service was not a termination simplicitor but punitive in nature with stigma in the service career and as such, it is dismissal from service without any departmental proceeding. 6. LEARNED trial Judge by the impugned judgment under appeal discussed at length, the rival contentions of the parties and following the case Dipti prakash Banerjee vs. Satvendra Nath Bose National Centre for Basic Sciences, calcutta and Ors., reported in AIR 1999 SC 983 held that as there was positive findings/conclusions so far as commission of something, which crystallized to the grounds as taken in paragraph 4, 8, 13, 14, 16, 17 and 18 of the resolution aforesaid, it was not a case of termination simplicitor but a dismissal from service and thereby allowed the writ application directing joining of the writ petitioner as Principal in the said College with all benefits including the payments of difference of salary of a Principal of a College vis-'-vis a Lecturer of a college during the period when the writ petitioner worked in his original post of lecturer in his old College after termination of service wherefrom he came on lien to serve in the post of Principal. The ordering portion of the judgment under appeal reads such: 'i thus set aside the resolution dated 6th May, 2003, passed by the college authority and direct the college authority to restore the petitioner to the said post with effect from June 1, 2004. However, the college authority will be tree to initiate regular enquiry proceedings against the petitioner on the basis of those allegations and on the basis of those allegations they can take appropriate step if they are dissatisfied with the defence that would be taken by the petitioner against those allegations so long those allegations are not proved by regular enquiry proceeding the petitioner should continue as the principal of college the petitioner should be deemed to be inservice as principal all through and he will be entitled to get only the amount of difference of pay between that of a principal and his actual salary paid to him as a lecturer as he was taken back in his old college as lecturer from 7th May, 2003. For other service benefits the aforesaid period will be taken into consideration as it he was working as a Principal. The writ application is disposed of which the above direction. ' Mr. Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya, learned Senior Advocate, appearing for the appellants submitted strongly that there was no stigma casted in the service career of the writ petitioner as he got a chance to go back to his original service of Lecturer in the College, wherefrom on lien, he joined in the post of principal on probation. It is further contended that the grounds as were taken totaling twenty in numbers, all were clarificatory in nature to identify the dissatisfaction of the Governing Body by assessing the job performed by the writ petitioner-Principal and those cannot be stamped as stigma on service career. Mr. Bhattacharya has referred the following judgments passed in the cases Muir mills Unit of NTC (U. P.) Ltd. vs. Swayam Prakash Srivastava and Anr., reported in (2007) 1 SCC 491 , Registrar, High Court of Gujarat and Anr. Vs. C. G. Sharma, reported in (2005) 1 SCC 132 , Abhijit Gupta vs. S. N. B. National Centre, Basic sciences and Ors., reported in (2006) 4 SCC 469 , Pavanendra Narayan Verma vs. Sanjay Gandhi PGI of Medical Sciences and Anr., reported in (2002) 1 SCC 520 , allahabad Bank Officers' Association and Anr. Vs. Vs. C. G. Sharma, reported in (2005) 1 SCC 132 , Abhijit Gupta vs. S. N. B. National Centre, Basic sciences and Ors., reported in (2006) 4 SCC 469 , Pavanendra Narayan Verma vs. Sanjay Gandhi PGI of Medical Sciences and Anr., reported in (2002) 1 SCC 520 , allahabad Bank Officers' Association and Anr. Vs. Allahabad Bank and Ors., reported in (1996) 4 SCC 504 , Gujarat Steel Tubes Ltd. etc. vs. Gujarat Steel Tubes mazdoor Sabha and Ors., reported in AIR 1980 SC 1896 , Dr. Mrs. Sumati P. Shere vs. Union of India and Ors., reported in (1989) 3 SCC 311 and Samsher Singh vs. State of Punjab and Anr., reported in AIR 1974 SC 2192 to submit that order of discharge was 'termination simplicitor', the grounds as taken are within the zone of motive to identify the dissatisfactory service and those are not at all foundation to identify the decision as stigmatized decision to produce a result of dismissal from service. It has been further contended that the very use of the words 'found not dependable', 'lack of potential', 'beyond appreciation' are not carrying any stigmatized decision in view of the views expressed by the Apex Court in the case allahabad Bank Officers' Association and Anr. Vs. Allahabad Bank and Ors., reported in (1996) 4 SCC 504 . 7. ON the other hand, Sri Saktinath Mukherjee, learned Senior Advocate, resisted this appeal by submitting that the impugned resolution ex facie is a stigmatized decision and there was clear findings by the Governing Body while taking the grounds as noted in the resolution to identify the unsatisfactory service. In view of such clear findings, it became a foundation to pass a decision, as such the decision of discharge is not 'termination simplicitor' but a dismissal from service without any departmental proceeding on concluding a finding that the writ petitioner committed misconduct. Learned Advocate for the respondent-writ petitioner relied upon solely on the judgment Dipti Prakash Banerjee (supra) and also has drawn the attention of the Court about the distinction of foundation and motive by referring the case Gujarat Steel Tubes Ltd. and Ors. (supra. Mr. Saktinath Mukherjee, learned Senior Advocate, further submitted that there was a necessity of giving a warning before the decision to discharge from service was taken. (supra. Mr. Saktinath Mukherjee, learned Senior Advocate, further submitted that there was a necessity of giving a warning before the decision to discharge from service was taken. It is submitted that the impugned decision in the writ application was nothing but a stigmatized decision and with the specific foundation of misconduct, hence, decision was bad in law, which rightly has been quashed by the learned trial Judge. 8. HAVING regard to the submission of the parties, the only point as is required to be considered by the Appeal Court is as to whether the judgment under appeal suffers from any illegality for which the judgment is liable to be quashed. It is a settled legal proposition of law that probationer has no right to the post and his service is terminable, if his service is dissatisfactory as per opinion of the employer. Though the probationary service is terminable but it is a settled legal position now that if the termination of service of a probationer is on the basis of a finding of allegation, such decision would be vitiated on the ground of violation of principle of natural justice as the decision maker did not allow any opportunity to the probationer to answer the allegation as considered for an ex parte finding against the employee probationer without following any departmental proceeding on giving opportunity of hearing. It is a settled legal position that if the termination of a probationer's service is on the basis of a motive, it will be a termination simplicitor and the decision will not be vitiated but on the contrary if the decision is on the basis of a findings of guilty and stigmatized, the same is attracted by the principle of natural justice, which speaks that nobody to be blamed without giving any opportunity of hearing and under such situation, the order of termination will not be termed as termination simplicitor but a dismissal from service on specific findings of misconduct without any departmental proceeding and as such, the same being hit by principle of natural justice is liable to be set aside and quashed. The summary of the views expressed by the Apex Court on the point that when an order of termination of a probationer would be a termination simplicitor and when it will be a dismissal from service on the findings of misconduct alleged is quoted herein below from the case Dipti Prakash Banerjee (supra) : 'as pointed out in Bishan Lal Gupta v. State of Haryana, (1978) 1 SCC 202 : ( AIR 1978 SC 363 ), an ordinary inquiry by a show cause might be sufficient for the purpose of deciding whether the probationer could be continued. But where the findings regarding misconduct are arrived at without conducting a regular departmental inquiry, then the termination order will be vitiated. ' The word 'stigma' also have been defined in the case Kamal Kishore lakshman vs. Management of M/s. Pan American World Airways Inc. and Ors., reported in (1987) 1 SCC 146 in the following language: '7. Having heard learned counsel, we are inclined to reiterate the view taken in Chandu Lal case that the plea of loss of confidence in the employee indeed casts a stigma. As was pointed out in Roble v. Green the employee is expected to promote the employer's interests in connection with which he has been employed and a necessary implication which must be engrafted on such a contract is that the servant undertook to serve his master with good faith and fidelity. This view has been accepted by several High Courts in India and meets with our approval. In the absence of a statutory definition of the word 'stigma', we shall refer to its meaning as available in dictionaries. 8. According to Webster's New World Dictionary it is something that detracts from the character or reputation of a person, a mark, sign, etc. indicating that something is not considered normal or standard. The legal Thesuras by Burton gives the meaning of the word to be blemish, defect, disgrace, disrepute, imputation, mark or disgrace or shame. The Webster's Third New International Dictionary gives the meaning as a mark or label indicating a deviation from a norm. According to yet another dictionary 'stigma' is a matter for moral reproach. ' 9. HAVING regard to those settled legal position, the impugned resolution of governing Body, whereby writ petitioner suffered order of discharge from service during probationary period is now to be tested. According to yet another dictionary 'stigma' is a matter for moral reproach. ' 9. HAVING regard to those settled legal position, the impugned resolution of governing Body, whereby writ petitioner suffered order of discharge from service during probationary period is now to be tested. The grounds as taken to reach the decision of dissatisfactory service whether is attracted by the definition of 'stigma and a finding' on the reflection of settled legal position of law, are discussed in details by referring the grounds as well as the views expressed: 'ground No. 7: though the intake capacity in regard to admission of students in B. A. /b. Sc. /b. Com. General and Honours streams has been fixed by the University Dr. Khan has to be squarely blamed for admission of students during the academic session 2002-2003 far beyond intake capacity in different hons. subjects and general course at the undergraduate level and specially for gross anomaly in admission in b. Sc. Zoology Hons. course through admission of two students/in zoology Hons. with lower marks superseding those with higher marks leading to unprecedented students agitation and boycott of classes by the students followed by near halt of the academic progress of the Institution. On a bare reading the said ground it appears that the writ petitioner-probationer was blamed for admission of students beyond the intake capacity without providing any opportunity of hearing to him seeking an explanation about circumstances under which he admitted the students beyond intake capacity or whether he was responsible for such or not. Hence, this ground is nothing but a finding on the allegation by the Governing Body Members without giving any opportunity of hearing, hence, it has vitiated the order of discharge by changing its colour to dismissal from service without any departmental proceeding on the charge as considered. Ground No. 8: it is a matter of shame for the institution and a gross violation of the G. . noms when Dr. Khan, the probationer Principal of kanchrapara College did neither report to G. B. nor got the fact approved by G. B. in its meeting that he had admitted students far beyond the intake capacity fixed by the University of Kalyani. Incidentally all this was done in blatant violation of the decision taken in the G. B. meeting dated 2. 09. 2002 and subsequently confirmed in another G. B. Meeting dt. 27. 11. 2002. Incidentally all this was done in blatant violation of the decision taken in the G. B. meeting dated 2. 09. 2002 and subsequently confirmed in another G. B. Meeting dt. 27. 11. 2002. All this amply proves that he was tended to tamper with g. B. resolution adopted in G. B. meeting were found to differ to with those taken up for confirmation in the immediately next G. B. Meeting. On a bare reading of the said ground it appears that there is a definite conclusion that the writ petitioner-probationer intended to tamper the Governing Body resolutions without any show-cause notice asking him to answer on that point and without seeking any explanation from him on that issue, which is attracted by the principle of natural justice, which has changed the colour of discharge from termination simplicitor to dismissal from service without prove of charge following the procedures of law. Ground No. 17: dr. Khan is found to be guilty of abuse of power by putting on duty mark in the attendance register at random without submitting supportive documents and without approval by the President of the governing Body. On a bare reading of the said ground it appears that the governing Body have used the word 'guilty of abuse of the power', but such finding as reached was a finding without giving any opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioner-probationer and asking him to explain, as such, it is breach of natural justice. Ground No. 18: 18. On the occasion of the inauguration of the P. G. Course in hindi on 09. 10. 2002 Dr. Khan single handedly chalked out a programme which started with the Swarswati Vandana to the extreme displeasure of the University official and other guests. Dr. Biswanath roy Chowdhury Secretary WBCUTA North 24-Parganas Dist. Committee left the function in protest Different Circle condemned Dr. Khan's shameful act and he was very much responsible for embarssing the college authority and lowering the prestige of the Institution. On a bare reading, it appears that for setting up of a programme of 'swaraswati Vandana' in an inauguration function, the action of writ petitioner-probationer was termed as shameful act and the said act was identified as an act lowering the prestige of the institution. It is a clear case of finding of guilty without any show-cause and opportunity of hearing to explain following the principle of natural justice. It is a clear case of finding of guilty without any show-cause and opportunity of hearing to explain following the principle of natural justice. Hence, this ground has changed the colour of discharge as dismissal. Ground No. 19: kanchrapara College submitted an abstract the of cost of two parts Rs. 20,00,000. 00 (Twenty Lakh only) and Rs. 21,00,000,00 (Twenty One lakh only) respectively against project of construction of a new building and the plan was sanctioned by the Chief Engineer PWD. As a result the department of Higher Education Government of West bengal released a total of Rs. 20,00,000. 00 in the first phase including the college share of 25% of the amount Dr. Khan miserably failed during his one year tenure as probationer principal to produce the final utilization certificate till date and get the remaining Rs. 21,00,000 00/-released though the college share for the amount to be released in the second phase has been spent by the college. On a reading of the said ground it appears that the decision was reached by a finding that the probationer failed to produce the final utilization certificate, which is a positive finding without asking any explanation why there was a delay to submit such final utilization certificate, as such it is also attracted by breach of natural justice principle. Ground No. 20: although Dr. Mrs. Anima Kumar (Konar) reader in Philosophy retired on 31. 01. 2002, Dr. Khan failed to submit requisition in proper manner to the West Bengal College Service Commissioner till date for sending a teacher in philosophy against the vacant post. On a bare reading of this ground it appears that there is a positive finding that the writ petitioner-probationer failed to submit the requisition for recommending a candidate to the post of Philosophy. This finding was reached without seeking any explanation from the principal as to why there was such failure on his part. Hence, it is also a breach of principle of natural justice, which has vitiated the order of discharge. ' 10. CONSIDERING the aforesaid grounds it appears that those grounds became the material ingredient/element to reach a decision not to extend the probationary period further one year and to discharge the petitioner forthwith. Hence, it is also a breach of principle of natural justice, which has vitiated the order of discharge. ' 10. CONSIDERING the aforesaid grounds it appears that those grounds became the material ingredient/element to reach a decision not to extend the probationary period further one year and to discharge the petitioner forthwith. As those grounds are within the realm of 'finding' and not 'motive', this Court is of the view that the order of discharge was not a 'termination simplicitor' but a 'dismissal from service' without any departmental proceeding and following the principle of natural justice. It appears that the writ petitioner's service is controlled by the said Act of 1975, whereby under Section 5 Sub-section (1), there is a scope for extension of service for a further period of one year. Sub-section (1) of Section 5 is re-quoted for appreciation of the point as discussed below, which reads such: '5. Probation.- (1) A teacher appointed against a permanent vacancy shall be on probation ordinarily for a period of one year from the date of such appointment and such period of probation may at the discretion of the Governing Body be extended for a further period not exceeding one year. ' 11. ON a reading of the said statutory provision it appears that one year probationary period has been prefixed with the word 'originally', which means the word 'normally' and there is a scope for extension of the probationary period for one year more, as such, the statute has fixed the maximum probationary period of two years out of which one year is normal period and another one year is extended period based on discretion of the Governing Body. It pre-supposes the proposition that after one year there should be assessment of job performed by the probationer and if the Governing Body is not satisfied, an opportunity should be given to cure the defects, if any, by extending the probationary period for a further period of one year. If such proposition is not considered as a right proposition, the situation would be that further exercise of discretionary power of the Governing Body extending the service for one year more would be a redundant provision in the statute. If such proposition is not considered as a right proposition, the situation would be that further exercise of discretionary power of the Governing Body extending the service for one year more would be a redundant provision in the statute. As per our reading said Section 5 since has provided total two years probationary period including the extension of one year therein and though the language has been used to exercise the discretionary power to extend such, but when the statute has provided to exercise such discretionary power, the Governing Body is lawfully bound to exercise such discretion potentially following the norms of fairness and reasonableness principle in discharge of their statutory function. Governing body failed to discharge such function as it appears from the resolution itself where the reason assigned in the form of twenty grounds amongst which some grounds as already quoted are attracted by the positive case of finding on allegation, which was not permissible to be taken while discharging a probationer on the ground of unsatisfactory job and other grounds when were required to be considered for extension of service to fill up the lacuna of dissatisfactory job in terms of the statutory provision, has not been considered by the Governing Body in due discharge of its function. 12. HENCE, Section 5 Sub-section (1) also has not been considered properly by the Governing Body of the College while taking the decision not to extend the service, namely, the probationary period for one year more. Having regard to our discussion above, accordingly, we are of the view that the decision of the learned trial Judge cannot be said as a decision, which should be interfered with by us in the appeal. Learned trial Judge considered the legal principle by scanning it and applying with the facts of the case, hence, we are not finding any illegality in such decision. Accordingly, we are not interfering with the impugned judgment under appeal. Appeal, thus, stand dismissed. However, no order as to cost.