Ravi S.Dhavan, J. - (1.) The only aspect which the Court has to examine in this appeal is whether the Judgment on the writ petition is in error or not.
(2.) The Court has heard learned counsel for the appellant. Mr. S. K. Verma. Senior Advocate, and learned counsel for the respondents. Mr. S. N. Verma. Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Jayant Banerji. Advocate.
(3.) The petitioner's services, as an Assistant Security Officer (on probation), were terminated by the Reserve Bank of India, by an order of 30 October, 1981. The powers under which the services of the petitioner had been terminated are not so relevant as the cause. Whatever be the cause, it had nothing to do with the petitioner's services within the Bank. But there is a residuary power in the Regulations of the Reserve Bank of India given a situation or a circumstance, to dispense with the services of an officer should he border on a conduct which reflects on moral turpitude. The decree of moral turpitude has been the subject-matter of submissions on this appeal.;