JUGDISH MITTER Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short question which arises in this appeal is whether the order passed by the Director of Postal Services on October 28, 1949, terminating the services of the appellant amounts to his dismissal under S. 240 (1) so as to attract the provisions of S. 240(3) of the Government of India Act, 1935.

(2.) The appellant was appointed as a temporary Second Division Clerk in the General Post Office, Lahore for a period of six months, on October 19, 1946. At the end of the initial period of six months, his appointment was continued from time to time until he was posted in the office of the Post Master General at Ambala, on August 12, 1947. Whilst he was working in that post, the impugned order was passed by which his services were terminated. That led to the present suit filed by the appellant on November 11, 1952 in which he claimed a declaration that the termination of his services was illegal on the ground that Rule 126 of the Posts and Telegraphs Manual Vol. II General Regulations, had been contravened, and no enquiry had been held against him after furnishing him with a charge-sheet in that behalf. It is from this suit that the present appeal arises.

(3.) The claim made by the appellant was disputed by the respondent, the Union of India on several grounds. It was alleged that the appellant was a temporary servant and as no declaration had been made in his favour that he had acquired the status of quasi-permanent servant, it was urged that his services could be terminated on a month's notice in terms of his contract. In such a case, no enquiry was required to be held and no charge-sheet had to be supplied to the appellant.