NARIAN SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The main question in this Regular Second appeal is whether the proviso to Article 311(2) of the Constitution is attracted to the facts of this case. The relevant part of the proviso reads as follows:-

(2.) On this question the trial court held that as the plaintiff was dismissed on conduct which led to his conviction, hence no show cause notice was necessary. This view has been affirmed by the Additional Senior Subordinate Judge. Now the plaintiff has come to this Court in second appeal.

(3.) The main contention of Mr. Shiv Charan Singh on behalf of the appellant is that the appellant has not been dismissed on conduct which led to his conviction; instead the appellant has been dismissed be- cause of his conviction. Learned counsel contends that there is a great difference between being dismissed for conduct which led to the con- viction and being dismissed because of the conviction. For the pur- pose of showing that the plaintiff has in fact been dismissed for being convicted and not for conduct leading to the conviction, I having been referred to the plaint and the written statement. In para 6 of the plaint the plaintiff stated as follows:-