Judgment

FAZAL ALI, J.:- Since we are clearly of the view that the special leave petition should be dismissed in limine on merits, I would not like to go any further into the details of the facts of the case. I would, therefore, refrain from expressing any opinion on the observations made by my learned brother Chinnappa Reddy, J.

CHINNAPPA REDDY, J.:- 2. This special leave petition has to be dismissed. There is no merit in it. The respondent was a teacher employed in a municipal school. The school was taken over by the Government in June, 1971. The respondent was absorbed in Government service by an order dated Feb. 28, 1972. The order recited that the absorption was subject to verification of antecedents and medical fitness. The services of the respondent were terminated on Nov. 5, 1974. Though the order terminating the services of the respondent did not purport to stigmatise him in any manner, it was not disputed before the High Court and it is no longer disputed before us that the order was founded on a report made by the Superintendent of Police, Raigarh on October 31, 1974, to the effect that the respondent was not a fit person to be entertained in Government service, as he had taken part in RSS and Jansangh activities. The High Court held that the order of termination of service was of a punitive character, and quashed it on the ground that the provisions of Art. 311 of the Constitution had not been complied with. The State of Madhya Pradesh has sought leave to appeal to this Court under Art. 136 of the Constitution.

3. India is not a police State. India is a democratic republic. More than 30 years ago, on Jan. 26, 1950, the people of India resolved to constitute India into a democratic republic and to secure to all its citizens "Liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship; Equality of status and opportunity"; and to promote "Fraternity, assuring the dignity of the individual". This determination of the people, let us hope, is not a forgotten chapter of history. The determination has been written into the articles of the Constitution in the shape of Fundamental Rights and they are what makes India a democratic republic and what marks India from authoritarian or police States. The right to freedom of speech and expression, the right to form associations and unions, the right to assemble peaceably and without arms, the right to equality before the law and the equal protection of the laws, the right to equality of opportunity in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the State are declared Fundamental Rights. Yet the Government of Madhya Pradesh seeks to deny employment to the respondent on the ground that the report of a Police Officer stated that he once belonged to some political organisation. It is important to note that the action sought to be taken against the respondent is not any disciplinary action on the ground of his present involvement in political activity after entering the service of the Government, contrary to some Service Conduct Rule. It is further to be noted that it is not alleged that the respondent ever participated in any illegal, vicious or subversive activity. There is no hint that the respondent was or is a perpetrator of violent deeds, or that be exhorted anyone to commit violent deeds. There is no reference to any addiction to violence or vice or any incident involving violence, vice or other crime. All that is said is that before he was absorbed in Government service, he had taken part in some RSS or Jansangh activities. What those activities were has never been disclosed. Neither the RSS nor the Jansangh is alleged to be engaged in any subversive or other illegal activity; nor are the organisations banned. Most people, including intellectuals, may not agree with the programme and philosophy of the Jansangh and the RSS or, for that matter, of many other political parties and organisations of an altogether different hue. But that is irrelevant. Everyone is en