- (1.) By means of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution petitioner has claimed relief for issue of writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 18.10.82 terminating the petitioner's services and restraining the respondents from interfering with his functioning as Director (Technical) National Textile Corporation (U.P) Ltd. Kanpur.
(2.) In July, 1976, the petitioner was appointed as Production Manager of Patlad Textile Mills, Patlad (Gujrat) Ltd. a unit of National Textile Corporation. The petitioner was, later on, appointed General Manager of Raj Nagar Textile Mills in Gujrat. In November, 1980, the petitioner was transferred to National Textile Corporation West Bengal (WBAB & Co) Calcutta. In May, 1982, the petitioner was transferred to National Corporation (U.P) and appointed as Director (Technical N.T.C (U.P). Kanpur. While the petitioner was posted at Calcutta, questions were raised in the Parliament that the petitioner was a dismissed employee of the State Government and even then he had been employed as Director of one of the subsidiary, companies of the National Textile Corporation on the basis of forged documents. On a direction issued by the Central Government, the N.T.C Ltd. New Delhi directed the Chairman-Managing Director, N.T.C (WBAO) Ltd. Calcutta, to obtain petitioner's explanation about his dismissal from service of West Bengal National Textile Corporation, West Bengal, and also the allegations of concealment of facts about his dismissal. On 17.5.82 the petitioner submitted his explanation which was considered by the N.T.C New Delhi. Thereafter, the Board of Directors of N.T.C (U.P) Ltd. decided to terminate the petitioner's services. Accordingly the Chairman-cum-Managing Director issued the termination order as contained in his letter dated 18.10.82 terminating his services with effect from that date. Aggrieved, the petitioner has challenged the validity of the order terminating his services. Sri Palok Basu, learned counsel for the petitioner, urged (1) the order of termination though innocuous on its face was issued by way of punishment without affording opportunity of defence to the petitioner, (2) the termination of petitioner's services is arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and (3) the petitioner being the Director of a Company could be removed only in accordance with Section 284 of the Companies Act.
(3.) National Textile Corporation, New Delhi, is a Government Company within the meaning of Section 617 of the Companies Act. It is a holding Company which has got a number of subsidiary Government Companies including N.T.C (Gujrat) Ltd. N.T.C (U.P) Ltd., and N.T.C (WBAO). The petitioner's services were terminated at a time when he was employed as Director (Technical) N.T.C (U.P) Kanpur, which is also a Government Company. The petitioner had been appointed as a Director by the Board of Directors under Article 85(d) read with Article 133 of the Articles of Association of N.T.C, (U.P) Ltd. Kanpur. It appears that a direction was issued by the N.T.C, New Delhi, the holding Company, to its subsidiary Company N.T.C (U.P) for terminating the petitioner's services. The Board of Directors of the N.T.C (U.P) resolved to terminate the petitioner's services at its meeting in accordance with the direction of the holding Company. The petitioner's services were terminated in accordance with the Articles of Association which regulated terms of contract of service.;