KRISHNAN Vs. DIVISIONAL ENGINEER OF TELEGRAPHS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was a temporary Telephone operator attached to the Telephone Exchange at Cochin. His services were terminated by Ext. B, a Memo dated the 27th September 1956, which reads as follows:

(2.) It is agreed that the petitioners employment is governed by the Central Civil Service (Temporary Service) Rules, 1949. R.5 of the said Rules is in the following terms:

(3.) The only other contention urged before me is that the termination of the petitioners services violates Art.311 of the Constitution and should be set aside on that ground. As pointed out in Balai Chand Basak v. Boy Choudhury AIR 1954 Calcutta 495 Art.311 makes no distinction between permanent and temporary employees and I propose to assume that the petitioner is entitled to the safeguards provided therein.