PREM CHAND BHATIA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question for decision in this petition is as to the content and scope of clause (1) of Article 310 of the Constitution in the context of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 in relation to civil personnel in defence service in the matter of termination of the services by the President.

(2.) The petitioner joined service on June 12, 1965 in the Research and Development Organisation, Defence Science Laboratory under the Government of India in the Ministry of Defence as Junior Scientific Assistant. After completing the probationary period of three years he was declared quasi-permanent. On December 7, 1971, the Administrator of the Union territory of Delhi in exercise of powers under sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971 directed that he be detained with a view to preventing him from acting in a manner prejudicial to the defence of India and to the security of the Union Territory of Delhi. In pursuance of the order he was actually detained with effect from December 8, 1971. The grounds on the basis of which the petitioner was detained were also served on him on December 14, 1971. By a subsequent order dated December 18, 1971, however, the detention order was revoked. By another order dated December 21, 1971 he was suspended from service with effect from December 8, 1971, the date of his detention in terms of sub-rule (2) of Rule 10 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 1965, hereafter called "the Rules". By order dated January 1, 1973 his services were then terminated by the impugned order of the President acting under clause (1) of Article 310 of the Constitution. In the writ petition, the petitioner has challenged this order.

(3.) At one stage during trial there was dispute between the parties whether the impugned order was an order passed by the President himself but the respondents produced the original file containing the order. In fact Shri Tandon brought this file with him at the time of arguments also and this has put an end to the controversy and it has not been urged before us that he impugned order was not passed by the President himself under his own hand.