Trainee/Probationer Not A Workman Within S. 2(s) Of ID Act; Termination Doesn't Amount To Retrenchment: Delhi HC [Read Judgment]

"…a probationer is not a workman within the meaning of Section 2 of the Industrial Disputes Act and the service of a probationer can be terminated during the period of probation in terms of the appointment and such termination does not amount to retrenchment within the meaning of Section 2 of the Industrial Disputes Act", held the Delhi High Court while allowing a petition filed by. "…a probationer is not a workman within the meaning of Section 2 of the Industrial Disputes Act and the service of a probationer can be terminated during the period of probation in terms of the appointment and such termination does not amount to retrenchment within the meaning of Section 2 of the Industrial Disputes Act", held the Delhi High Court while allowing a petition filed by M/s Deccan Charters Private Limited through Advocate Praveen Kumar. Justice J.R. Midha relied on the decision of a division bench of the high court in Mahinder Singh v. Indian Airlines Ltd., 2016 SCC OnLine Del 5008, wherein in very similar circumstances, the bench had held "termination of service of a probationer in terms of the stipulation contained in the contract of employment does not tantamount to "retrenchment" within the meaning of Section 2 of the Act since it is covered by clause of Section 2 of the Act. Conclusively, he decided "petitioner is not a workman within the definition of 2 of the Industrial Disputes Act and there is no infirmity in her termination during the extended probation period."