Amar Nath Varma, J. - (1.) AN episode during a trek by a group of I.A.S. Probationers including the petitioner as part of their training between 1st and 3rd October, 1981, resulted not only in the discharge of the petitioner from the Indian Administrative Service under the impugned order passed by the Central Government, but also in the quitting on that issue of Sri P.S. Appu, a very senior Civil Servant, who was then the Director of the Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration, Mussoorie. The episode and its aftermath generated country wide reaction, echoing through the entire national Press and becoming in its wake the subject of considerable heated debate in Parliament. Initially the Central Government soft pedaled the issue, taking a lenient view of the conduct and behaviour of the petitioner, an I.A.S. Probationer undergoing training in the aforesaid Academy, and decided to let him off with a warning. But subsequently on Sri Appu's taking a premature voluntary retirement in protest against what he described as the cavalier fashion in which the Central Government glossed over so serious a matter by letting off the petitioner, and, later, as a result of the letter of Sri Appu addressed to the Prime Minister Mrs. Indira Gandhi expressing his deep sense of shock at the total indifference shown by the Central Government over a grave issue arising from what he considered an act of gross misconduct committed by the petitioner during the trek mentioned above, the Central Government reconsidered the matter and passed the impugned order dated 5th March, 1982, discharging the petitioner from Indian Administrative Service ostensibly on the ground that he was unsuitable for being a member of the said Service purporting to exercise powers under Clause (b) of Rule 12 of the Indian Administrative Service (Probation) Rules, 1954.
(2.) THE question which was the subject of main debate at the Bar is the perennial one, namely, whether the impugned order which is innocuous on its face, is, in truth and substance, an order of discharge simpliciter or is one intended to punish the petitioner so as to attract the application of Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India. In order to answer the question posed above, it will be necessary to project the background of facts and surrounding circumstances in which the impugned order came to be passed. A brief resume of the facts would, therefore, be necessary.
(3.) AFTER passing the I.A.S. Examination held in 1908, the petitioner was selected for appointment to the Indian Administrative Service through a letter of appointment dated August 6, 1981. On September 1, 1981 the petitioner joined the Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration, Mussoorie as an I.A.S. Probationer. The petitioner was earlier selected for the National Defence Academy where he continued from 1968 to 1971. In the year 1971 he was withdrawn from the National Defence Academy. Thereafter he joined the Indian Foreign Service (B) in 1978 and while in that service, he appeared at the I.A.S. Examination and was declared successful as mentioned above in 1980.;