Point of Law : Service – Termination of service - Termination without an inquiry / show cause notice is stigmatic in nature is concerned, the said judgments have no applicability in the facts of this case wherein the terms of appointment as noted above are very clear, inasmuch as that the appointment of the petitioner as CMD, FAGMIL was for a period of five years or till the age of superannuation or even for a lesser period and also in view of my conclusion above justifying non-renewal of tenure of the petitioner on the ground that he is not clear from vigilance angle.

JUDGMENT :

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J.

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners with the following prayers: -

“It is, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to take this present Writ Petition into the consideration and issue the appropriate writ or order or directions:

(a) Issue writ in nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 01.12.2016 and extract note dated 25.11.2016 as arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional; and/or

(b) Issue writ in nature of mandamus/certiorari quashing the office memorandum dated 15.12.2016 issued Respondent No. 1 & 2 as illegal and unconstitutional; and/or

(c) Issue writ in nature of mandamus directing the Respondent No. 1 & 2 to reinstate the petitioner as the Chairman & Managing Director of FCI Aravali Gypsum & Mineral India Limited in terms of circulars dated 31.03.2011, 13.05.2011, 28.06.2011 & 30.10.2014 with effect from 01.12.2016 with full back wages and benefits and/or

(d) Issue writ in nature of mandamus to the Respondent No. 1 & 2 to pay full pay and allowances along with interest considering the petitioner as on duty from the date of illegal removal till the date when one would have superannuated/retired in normal course i.e. on attaining age of 60 years. The present petitioner would be attaining age of 60 yrs on 27.10.2019; and/or

(e) Pass any other further orders as is deemed to be fit and proper in the discharge of justice in favour of the petitioner.”

2. In effect, the Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner to set aside the office order dated December 01, 2016, whereby on the completion of tenure of the petitioner as the Chairman and Managing Director (‘CMD’, for short), of F.C.I. Aravali Gypsum and Minerals India Limited (‘FAGMIL’, for short), he was relieved of his duties and for a direction that the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 reinstate the petitioner as CMD, FAGMIL, the respondent No. 4 in this petition.

3. The facts as noted from the petition and submitted by the petitioner are that while he was working at Project and Development India Limited (‘PDIL’, for short), the Public Enterprises Selection Board (‘PESB’, for short), under the administrative control of the Department of Fertilizers advertised the post of CMD, FAGMIL. He forwarded his bio-data to PESB along with vigilance clearance from PDIL. He was selected and consequent thereto, PESB and the Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers, after taking clearance from the Central Vigilance Commission (“CVC”, for short), through a presidential directive vide letter No. 90/2/2010-HR-I dated March 03, 2011, appointed the petitioner as the CMD of respondent No. 4. He was allowed to retain his lien in PDIL for a period of five years with effect from March 07, 2011, vide the PDIL office memorandum dated March 07, 2011 in consonance with the Department of Public Enterprises (‘DPE’, for short) O.M. No. 23/19/98/GL-014/DPE dated January 13, 1999.

4. It was stated by the petitioner that the appointment of the petitioner as CMD of respondent No. 4 was for 5 years and the said period was extendable till superannuation on the basis of the criteria fixed by the Appointment Committee of the Cabinet (‘ACC’, for short), Department of Personnel and Training (‘DoPT’, for short), DPE and PESB.

5. He stated that as per ACC rules issued on March 31, 2011, all proposals where incumbents meet the benchmark and the Ministry decides to recommend extension shall be referred to the ACC for approval not later than two months before the scheduled expiry of the term, and that in a Schedule ‘C’ company, extension can be granted by the Cabinet Minister, but for non-extension/termination, the ACC is the competent authority.

6. It was contended by the petitioner that he is entitled for extension beyond the period of five years because according to the PESB letter dated May 13, 2011, the date of superannuation of the petitioner is October 31, 2019. The petitioner further stated that on June 16. 2015, he submitted self-appraisal