ORDER :- In all these four writ petitions, the respective petitioners challenge the orders passed by the appropriate authorities terminating their officiating services as teachers in the Education Department of the State. As the grounds of attack taken on behalf of the petitioners, and the defence of the State in all these matters are substantially common, all the writ petitions have been heard together.

2. The questions that arise for consideration in alt these writ petitions are (1) whether any of the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioners under the Constitution have been in any manner infringed or violated by the orders under attack; and (2) whether the State Government is bound to disclose the grounds, on the basis of which they have come to the conclusion that the character and antecedents of each of these petitioners are not such as to make them eligible for appointment to service under the State.

3. In O.P. Nos. 119, 497 and 532 of 1962, the circumstances under which the petitioners were appointed to the officiating posts as also the reasons given by the authorities for terminating their services are substantially the same. Therefore, so for as these writ petitions are concerned, I will refer only to the averments made in O.P. No. 119 no. of 1962, as well as to the order of termination passed therein.

4. The petitioner in O.P. No. 119 of 1962 completed the S.S.L.C. and Teachers Training Coarse of Examinations. He applied to the Public Service Commission of the State for selection for appointment as a teacher under the Government. The Public Service Commission informed the petitioner that he was selected for recruitment as Leave Reserve Primary Teacher in the Education Department. But the petitioner also admits that the aid communication clearly stated that the selection of the petitioner is subject to whatever further checking Government may find it necessary to do.

5. Later, he was informed by a communication issued by the District Educational Officer, Kozhikode, dated 17-1-1961, Ex. P. 1, that the petitioner has been advised for recruitment as Leave Reserve Primary Teacher in the Kozhikode District. Accordingly he was appointed to officiate as teacher in a Government school mentioned therein. But while he was serving as a teacher, the District Educational Officer passed an order dated 1-12-61, Ex. P. 3, wherein it is stated that in view of the adverse reports received regarding the character and antecedents of the teachers mentioned therein, who have been appointed under Ex. P. 1, the District Educational Officer orders that the appointments be terminated on the expiry of one month from the date of receipt of the proceeding by the teachers. There is no controversy that this order, Ex. P. 3, takes in the petitioners in O.P. Nos. 119, 497 and 532 of 1962. In consequence of this direction issued by the District Educational Officer, the Assistant Educational Officer, under the Ex. P. 2, directed the Headmasters concerned of the schools in question to serve the copy of the proceedings, Ex. P. 3, on the petitioners and to terminate their appointments on the expiry of one month.

It is under these circumstances that the services of each of the petitioners in these three O.Ps. were terminated. These orders of termination are attacked by these petitioners as illegal and void. According to the petitioners, the reasons given for terminating their services are certain adverse reports stated to have been received, regarding their character and antecedents and inasmuch as the petitioners had a right to continue in Government service, the State Government was bound to disclose the nature of the enquiry made, as well as the conclusions arrived at by the State Government and should have also given an opportunity to the petitioners to offer their explanations. That course not having been adopted it is the case of the petitioners that the termination of their services under the circumstances, is in violation of Article 311 of the Co

Click Here to Read the rest of this document