Hegde, J. - (1.) These are appeals by special leave. A common question of law arises for decision in these two appeals. Hence it is convenient to consider them together. The material facts are more fully set out in Civil Appeal No. 1012 of 1966. We shall set out those facts in detail. We shall refer to the facts of Civil Appeal No. 1011 of 1966 thereafter, briefly.
(2.) The respondent in Civil Appeal No. 1012 of 1966, Jugal Kishore Bhatt was appointed as the Sales-tax Officer on June 29, 1948 by the Governor of U.P. At the time of his appointment the posts of Sales-tax Officers were temporary posts. He joined the service in the Sales-tax department at Bareilly on July 15, 1948. His appointment was a temporary basis. He continued to serve in that department as Sales-tax Officer until the year 1951 on temporary basis. In that year 1951 on temporary basis. In that year the Government issued G. O. No. ST. 419/X-941. Paragraph 4 of that order provided that as the posts detailed in the list annexed to the G. O. are likely to last for more than three years, the Governor is pleased to declare that the appointments made to those posts will be deemed to have been made in a substantive capacity and the incumbents thereof (shown in the list) other than those who are appointed to officiate in leave vacancies shall be treated as holders of those posts in a substantive capacity within the meaning of the order of the Governor regarding Fundamental Rule 26 (d) of the Financial Handbook, Volume II, Part II with retrospective effect from the date of their first appointments to those posts. The respondent continued in the department as Sales-tax Officer until 1953. In that year the Governor of U. P. in exercise of the powers conferred upon him by the provisions of Article 309 of the Constitution made the following rule: "(1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any existing rules and orders on the subject, the services of a Government servant in temporary service shall be liable to termination at any time by notice in writing given either by the Government servant to the appointing authority or by the appointing authority to the Government servant. (2) The period of such notice shall be one month given either by appointing authority to the Government servant, or by the Government servant to the appointing authority, provided that in the case of notice by the appointing authority, the latter may substitute for the whole or part of this period of notice, pay in lieu thereof; provided further that it shall be open to the appointing authority to relieve a Government servant without any notice or accept notice for a shorter period without requiring the Government servant to pay any penalty in lieu of notice. (3) This rule shall take immediate effect and shall apply to all persons who are appointed hereafter in a civil post in connection with the affairs of Uttar Pradesh and who are under the rule making control of the Governor, but who do not hold a lieu on any permanent Government post. (4) In this rule "temporary service" means officiating and substantive service in a temporary post, and officiating service in a permanent post, under the U. P. Government. (5) Nothing in this rule shall apply to: (a) government servant engaged on contract: (b) government servant not in wholetime employment; (c) government servant paid out of contingencies; (d) persons employed in workcharged establishments."
(3.) Sometime in February 1953, the respondent was informed by the Commissioner of Sales-tax, U. P. that his appointment would terminate on March 31, 1953; but he could be re-employed in the post but he will be subject to the rule set out earlier. The respondent was asked to intimate to the Government by March 23, 1953 whether he was prepared to the re-employed from April 1, 1953 on the said terms. The respondent signified his consent for re-appointment on the terms mentioned in the letter. Thereafter he continued in service up to March 31, 1954. Subsequently his appointment was extended for a period of one year from April 1, 1954 to March 31, 1955.;