( 1 ) THIS writ petition is filed for a declaration that the order of the 3rd respondent passed in DOD/proj. 482/95 dated 10-5-1995 terminating the contract dated 24-11-1994 as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction.

( 2 ) THE petitioner is a Doctorate in Physical Oceanagraphy. The respondent organisation i. e. , the National Remote Sensing Agency appointed the petitioner for a period of three years under D. O. D. Project i. e. , Department of Ocean Development. After the expiry of the period of three years, by proceedings dated 22-11-1993 he was appointed on contract basis for one more year, and on 20-11-1994, the services of the petitioner were terminated. Therefore, he filed a Writ Petition No. 22497 of 1994 and the same was admitted and is pending. Thereafter, the respondents again appointed the petitioner on a contract basis by its proceedings dated 20-11-1994. The subject-matter of the contract was "processing NDAA/avhrr (National Oceanic and atmospheric Administration)/ (Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometre for the Retrieval of SST and their utilisation in various oceanagraphic applications and also any other job assigned by the Project Manager/project co-ordinator from time to time and the duration of the contract was one year and the total contract amount payable was Rs. 46,800/ -. " The terms of payment are monthly on certification by the Project Manager. However, on 5-5-1995 i. e. , before the expiry of the period of one year mentioned under the contract dated 20-11-1994 a memorandum was issued proposing to terminate the contract on the grounds of misconduct. The petitioner submitted his explanation on 8-5-1995. On a consideration of the explanation, offered by the petitioner, the impugned order dated 10-5-1995 is passed, terminating the contract under which he was appointed to execute the project entrusted to him. Aggrieved by the termination, he filed the present writ petition.

( 3 ) THE party appeared in person. The main argument of the party-in-person is that in order to avoid the regularisation of his services, the respondents have adopted the method of terminating the contract though his performance was beyond doubt and excellent. Secondly the charges levelled against him are very vague and that the conclusion that he was not executing the work entrusted to him satisfactorily is not correct. He also submitted that in respect of the project viz. , the Retrieval of Sea Surface Temparature from National oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and Advanced Very High resolution Radiometre entrusted to him after collecting the data along with others, he prepared a paper on his own and sent it to the respondents for approval for sending it for publication. Since he has not received any reply from the respondent-organisation, he sent the paper for publication in international Journal. Therefore, there is no violation of any conduct rules and the respondents cannot terminate his services. His further contention is that the material which was sent for publication is not a secret one. It is a matter available in the open market. Therefore, the question of violation of any rules does not arise.

( 4 ) THIS writ petition came up before a single Judge who dismissed the same on the ground that the matter relates to a contract and this court cannot interfere under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and the appropriate remedy for the petitioner is a civil suit, against which, he filed a Writ Appeal no. 601 of 1995 which was allowed and the judgment of the learned Single judge was set aside and remanded the matter for consideration afresh. Hence, the writ petition is posted before me for fresh consideration.

( 5 ) THE Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the writ petition is not maintainable as the period of contract expired on 19-11-1995. Therefore, no direction could be issued under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to enforce a contract which has already expired. He