ORDER

1. The order of termination of the service of the petitioner was challenged by filing an application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi. Such application has been dismissed by the impugned order. The applicant was appointed as a temporary clerk by the District and Sessions Judge, Chandigarh, vide order dated 17-3-1982. He was continuing in temporary service on probation but it appears that his service was not found satisfactory and as a matter of fact on a number of occasions he was found by the successive judicial officers under whom the applicant was working that his integrity was questionable. Considering his service records, the temporary service of the applicant has been terminated.

2. Mr P.P. Rao, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that if termination has in fact been effected by way of punishment, the real purpose of the order and not the outer form of it, is required to be looked into by piercing the veil. He has submitted that if on the score of misconduct, the service is terminated without holding any departmental proceeding and giving the petitioner a chan