Judgement

MITTER, J. :- The only question involved in this appeal is, whether the order dated September 25, 1968 terminating the services of the respondent, a temporary Government servant was in accordance with the provisions of Rule 5 of the Central Civil Service (Temporary Service) Rules 1965, hereinafter referred to as the Rules .

2. The services of the Respondent appear to have been terminated on the basis of the directive contained in a circular dated 12th September 1968 that action should be taken against every employee who absented himself from duty on 19th September 1968. No contention was raised at any stage that no action could be taken under Rule 5. The said rule reads :-

"5. Termination of temporary service. -

(1) (a) The services of temporary Government servant who is not in quasi-permanent service shall be liable to termination at any time by a notice in writing given either by the Government servant to the appointing authority or by the appointing authority to the Government servant;

(b) the period of such notice shall be one month;

Provided that the services of any such Government servant may be terminated forthwith by payment to him of a sum equivalent to the amount of