The termination of a temporary employee can be based on unsuitability or misconduct as per the terms and conditions of service, without violating the principle of equality.

R.B. Misra, J.

1. None appears for the petitioner. Heard Mr. U.B. Saha, learned Government Advocate assisted by Mr. J. Majumder, learned Counsel for the respondents.

2. Record has been perused.

3. The petitioner vide order dated 15th November, 1990 of the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Tripura was appointed as Dental Surgeon in the Department of Health & Family Welfare Department on ad-hoc basis for a period of six months with effect from 4.9.1990 with certain condition indicated in the appointment order. By Order dated 22nd February, 1993 passed by the Joints Secretary to the Government of Tripura the petitioner's service was terminated under the proviso to sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 of the Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965 with the payment of sum equivalent to the amount of his pay plus allowances for one month in lieu of one month's notice thereof.

4. Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents which indicates that the petitioner had also submitted a forged certificate asserting him to be a scheduled caste candidate, however, on verification it was found that the certificate of the petitioner was not a genuine certificate, however, in respect of that aspect a disciplinary proceeding could have been started against petitioner for taking appropriate action against the petitioner. However, the respondent had not resorted to take any disciplinary action and passed an order terminating the service by an order simpliciter.

5. In State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr. v. Kaushal Kishore Shukla 1901 (62) FLR 350 (SC) the employee had been appointed on a temporary basis for a fixed tenure. During the period of his service, adverse entries were made in his character roll. Complaints were also received by the auditors of the employer. A summary inquiry was held. It was found that the auditor's complaint was correct. The employee was transferred to another post where he did not join and the employer terminated his services, the Supreme Court, while upholding the order of termination, observed that mere fact that prior to the issue of the termination an enquiry was held against the employee' did not make the order of termination. as punitive. It was observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kaushal Kishore Shukla (supra) as below :

(1) The Principle of 'last come first go' is applicable to a case where on account of reduction of work or shrinkage of cadre retrenchment takes place and the services of employees are terminated on' account of retrenchment. In the event of retrenchment the principle of 'last come first go' is applicable under which senior in service is retained while the junior's services are terminated. But this principle is not applicable to a case where the services of a temporary employee are terminated on the assessment of his work and suitability in accordance with terms and conditions of his service. If out of several temporary employees working in a department senior is found unsuitable on account of his work and conduct, it is open to the competent authority to terminate his service and retain the services of juniors who may be found suitable for the service. Such a procedure does not violate principle of equality, enshrined under Article 14 and 16. If a junior employee is hard working, efficient and honest his services could not be terminated with a view to accommodate the senior employee even though the is found unsuitable for the service it this principle is not accepted there would be discrimination and the order of termination of a junior employee would be unreasonable and discriminatory. On the admitted set of facts, the order of termination in the instant case, could not be rendered illegal or unjustified on the ground of juniors being retained in services. The view taken by the High Court is not sustainable in law."

(2) A temporary Government servant has no right to hold the post. Whenever, the competent authority is satisfied that the work and conduct of a temporary servant is not s