The relevance of character and antecedents to the duties of the post and the invalidity of termination without notice and reason in public service employment.

1. The petitioner having been selected by the Kerala Public Service Commission for recruitment as a clerk on Rs. 40 120 per mensem, was provisionally appointed a Lower Division Clerk by the District Collector, Palghat, by order Ext. P-2 dated March 13, 1962, which reads:

" .... The appointment is on a purely provisional basis terminable on one month's notice on either side or sooner on termination of the vacancies whichever is earlier and subject to the verification of their date of birth, educational qualification, certificate of physical fitness etc ...."

While he was thus employed, the District Collector terminated his service by order Ext. P-4 dated June 9, 1962 "with immediate effect" without assigning any reason therefor and without giving the stipulated one month's notice; and the same was implemented by the Tahsildar, Perintalmanna, who relieved him from service by order, Ext. P-3 dated June 14, 1962. (Though the date of relief is mentioned to be 12-4-1962 in Ext. P.3 served on the petitioner, the office copy thereof shown to us by the learned Government Pleader mentions it as 12-6-1962, the month being corrected with pen as 6 by an overwriting on the original typewritten figure 4.) It is to quash Exts. P-3 and P-4 by a writ of certiorari that this O. P. is moved.

2. The learned Government Pleader contended that the order of appointment reserves power in the Government to terminate the petitioner's service without assigning any reason, on a month's notice, that the instant termination was in exercise of that power and that therefore the petitioner could not claim any relief other than a month's pay in lieu of the notice. We do not feel convinced of this argument. Neither a month's notice, nor a month's salary in lieu of notice was given or offered to the petitioner before termination of his service. The plea in Para.10 of the counter affidavit on behalf of the State is thus:

"The petitioner is however eligible to get one month's notice pay if his services are terminated without notice. In the present case the Government have not denied the petitioner the notice pay. The question of payment of notice pay will be considered if requested for by the petitioner."

3. It is pertinent to note here that even now the petitioner has not been offered a month's pay in lieu of notice and the counter-affidavit says only that the Government, will consider the same "if requested for by the petitioner". Regarding employees in industries, the Supreme Court has held that failure to pay the prescribed compensation at the time of retrenchment renders orders of termination of their services "invalid and inoperative". (Vide The State of Bombay v. The Hospital Mazdoor Sabha AIR. 1960 SC. 610). We do not find any reason why the same shall not be the consequence of a non-compliance of a month's notice stipulated under Ext. P-2, particularly when a greater security in public service is envisaged in Art.16 and 311 of the Constitution. It must then follow that the impugned orders have to be declared invalid and inoperative for the reason that they were violative of the terms of Ext. P-2, there being no allegation of any misconduct in the service of the petitioner in this case.

4. The reason for the termination of the petitioner's service is given by the State in the counter-affidavit thus:

"The services of the petitioner were terminated for the sole reason that he was found not suitable for appointment to Government Service on verification of character and antecedents."

The standard of character and antecedents expected of a public servant must necessarily vary with the character of the post in which he is employed. That which may be very relevant for a "sensitive post" may be unnecessary for "the post of a last grade servant or a Lower Division Clerk in the Registration department. The test of "character and antecedents" for employment in public service must have a real relation to the duties and responsibilities of the post concerned. It furt