KALIPADA SARKAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner joined the SSB (Special Service Bureau) as a Constable on 26.1.1969. One of the terms of appointment of the petitioner was that the petitioner's service could be terminated forthwith by payment of an amount equivalent to the petitioner's pay and allowances for one month or on a month's notice by either side. The petitioner's service did come to be terminated forthwith on the strength of the proviso to sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 of the Central Civil Service (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965. This order was passed on 28.4. 1974. The petitioner submitted many representations to take him back in service but to no effect. Ultimately, this petition was filed in 1976 under Art. 226 of the Constitution.

(2.) The contention of the petitioner is that the order of termination though innocuous on the face of it has to be regarded as one of dismissal and as such violative of Art. 311 (2) of the Constitution inasmuch as the order was founded on an alleged in-disciplined act of the petitioner. As per the petitioner he had to undergo strenuous training from March 26,1974, and though he did his utmost in the training, he was found in-disciplined. By Memo of even No. dated 17.4.74, the petitioner was called to submit an explanation which he did in time. Thereafter, the impugned order was passed on 28.4.1974 by the Area Organiser of S.S.B., Tripura.

(3.) Shri Das appearing for the petitioner has contended that if the veil is lifted it would be seen that the petitioner's service was terminated because of the alleged in-disciplined act of the petitioner which would render the order of termination as one of punishment which cannot be maintained for violation of Art. 311(2) of the Constitution.