PREM BIHARILAL Vs. STATE OF MADHYA BHARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this case counsel for the Petitioner moves under Article 226, Constitution of India for a writ or a direction for quashing an order passed by the Madhya Bharat Government terminating the applicant's services from 12 -6 -1952.

(2.) BY a letter dated 27 -11 -1948 the Director of Civil Supplies Madhya Bharat wrote to the Petitioner stating that he had been selected for appointment to a temporary post of an Inspector in the Civil Supplies Department; that he should report himself immediately for duty to the Regional Controller, Gwalior; that the post was temporary and that he would be posted anywhere in Madhya Bharat. The Petitioner accepted the appointment on the terms stated in the letter. He served as inspector until 12 -9 -1950, when he went on one week's medical leave. On 18 -9 -1950 he was informed by the Collector of Gwalior that, under orders of the higher authorities he had been suspended till further orders. The Director of Civil Supplies also wrote to the applicant on 27 -9 -1950 that the Minister in charge of Food and Civil Supplies had sanctioned his suspension with effect from 12 -9 -1950 till the declaration of the result of an inquiry by the Anti -Corruption Department with regard to certain complaints against the applicant.

(3.) I think in considering the matters which (SIC)arise in this petition, it is legitimate and indecent (SIC) necessary to reiterate what has been state the decision of - 'Lilawatibai Mutatkar v.' State of Madhya Bharat' AIR 1952 Madh B 105 (PC) (SIC)about the position, the rights and safeguard given by the Constitution to the members of (SIC)Civil Service of a State. In that case after ana (SIC) lysing the provisions of Article 310 and 311 of the Constitution, it was pointed out that person (SIC) employed in the service of the State are engased (SIC) on the express statutory condition that the (SIC) hold their employment at the pleasure of President or the Governor or the Rajpramukh, the case may be, and that they can be dismissed removed or reduced in rank at the pleasure these authorities subject to the limitation imposed by Article 311; that this Article does not any way alter or affect the principle embody in Article 310 that a Government servant hole (SIC) office during the pleasure of the Head of the State; that Article 311only imposes certain statutory obligations before dismissal or removal reduction in rank can be effected and that it the breach of these statutory obligations the affords a cause of action to a person adversely affected to complain that his employment has been wrongly terminated.