The main legal point established in the judgment is that the termination of a temporary employee's service must be justified and non-discriminatory, in compliance with constitutional provisions.

1. This appeal is by the petitioner in O.P. 3038 of 1973 against the judgment of our learned brother Bhaskaran, J. dismissing the Original Petition. The petitioner was a temporary lineman (phones) and it is against the order terminating his service under R.5 of the Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965 (in short, the Rules) that the petitioner came to this court for relief. The order was challenged on the ground that the amendment to R.5 of the rules offends Art.14 and 16 and also Art.19 (1) (g) of the Constitution. This contention was not considered by the learned single judge, as the Union of India was not a party to the petition the sole respondent being the Sub Divisional Officer, Telegraphs, Trichur. The challenge to the rule is not pursued before us the challenge made to the order of termination of the petitioner's service was on the ground that such termination was not made in accordance with R.S. That ground too failed before the learned Single Judge.

2. The petitioner was selected for a prescribed course of training for linemen and after successful completion of the course he is said to have joined as lineman on 6th May 1973 pursuant to a memo, Ext. P-1 dated 2nd May 1973. The formal order appointing him as temporary lineman was served on the petitioner only on 5th September 1973, though it was with effect from 6th May 1973. On the same day he was served with another memo Ext. P3, dated Ist September 1973 by which his services were terminated forthwith. This notice, Ext. P3, was not preceded by any notice to show cause nor was any offer of payment of a month's salary in lieu of notice made in Ext. P-3. The order did not state the reason why the services of the petitioner were terminated. R.5 of the rules, together with a note to the rule which is based upon an administrative instruction as it stood prior to the amendment of the rule by notification dated 23rd June 1972 read thus:

"5. (1) (a) The service of a temporary Government Servant who is not in quasi permanent service shall be liable to termination at any time by a notice in writing given either by the Government Servant to the appointing authority, or by the appointing authority to the Government Servant;

(b) The period of such notice shall be one month.

Provided that the service of any such Government servant may be terminated forthwith by payment to him of a sum equivalent to the amount of his pay plus allowances for the period of the notice at the same rates at which he was drawing them immediately before the termination of his services, or, as the case may be, for the period by which such notice falls short of one month.

(2) (a) Where a notice is given by the appointing authority terminating the services, of a temporary Government servant, or where the services of any such Government servant is terminated either on the expiry of the period of such notice or forthwith by payment of pay plus allowances, the Central Government or any other authority specified by the Central Government in this behalf may, of its own motion or otherwise, reopen the case and after making such inquiry as it deems fit

(i) confirm the action taken by the appointing authority;

(ii) withdraw the notice;

(iii) reinstate the Government servant in services; or

(iv) make such other order in the case as it may consider proper:

Provided that except in special circumstances, which should be recorded in writing, no case shall be reopened under this sub-rule after the expiry of three months:

(i) From the date of notice, in a case where notice is given;

(ii) From the date of termination of service, in a case where no notice is given.

(b) Where a Government Servant is reinstated in service under sub-rule (2) the order of reinstatement shall specify

(i) the amount or proportion of pay and allowances, if any, to be paid to the Government servant for the period of his absence between the date of termination of his services and the date of his reinstation; and

(ii) whether the said per