- (1.) THE respondent, Rawat Prakash Pandey, was appointed as a tem porary Assistant Master in the service of the U. P. Government in 1963. On July 1, 1968 an order terminating his service on one month's notice was served on him. The legitimacy of this order is canvassed before us.
(2.) THE order does not profess to as sign reasons for terminating his service. It is perfectly innocuous. But the respon dent claims that its innocent appearance cannot pass muster of Article 19 (1) (c) of the Constitution. We accept this claim. Admittedly the respondent's character roll is satisfactory. He has not received any adverse entry. But it is ad mitted before us that he is a member of the Rashtriya Swayam Sewak Sangh. It is, however, asserted that he had not been indulging during service "in any activity to which objection could be legitimately taken." In paragraph sixteen of the peti tion it is said: "The action of the Govern ment in terminating the services of the (appellant) is mala fide in that the ground on which the services of the (appellant) have been terminated, viz., the alleged association of the (appellant) with the Rashtriya Swayam Sewak Sangh is no 'ground for the termination of the (appel lant's) services". Paragraph thirteen of the counter-affidavit replies to this paragraph: the contents of paragraph 16 are not admitted. The allegation of male fide on the part of the Government is emphatical ly denied. It is stated that the termina tion order is a simple order and it has not been, passed without any motive."
(3.) WE gave an opportunity to the Standing Counsel to satisfy us by a sup plementary affidavit whether the impugn ed order was made for reasons other than the appellant's membership or his parti cipation in the activities of the Rashtriya Swayam Sewak Sangh. But the State has not filed any affidavit till today. We are satisfied that the impugned order was passed on account of the appellant's membership or his alleged participation in the activities of the Rashtriya Swayam j Sewak Sangh or .both.;