C.A. Vaidialingam, J.

1. In these proceedings under Art.226 of the Constitution Sri V.K. Krishna Menon, learned counsel for the writ petitioner, seeks to quash the order of the first respondent, dated 13th September 1960 terminating the petitioners services, as well as the consequential memorandum, Ext. P2, dated 16th September 1960 issued by the second respondent

2. The circumstances under which this writ petition has been filed are briefly as follows:

The petitioner, a Medical Practitioner, has passed the M.B.B.S. examination of the Madras University in December 1945 and she has also passed the examination for diploma in Gynaecology and Obstetrics in 1948. After serving as a HouseSurgeon in the Stanley Medical Hospital and the Government Women and Children's Hospital, Madras, the petitioner claims to have specialised in midwifery, Gynaecology and Obstetrics and diseases of children. She was appointed as Honorary Assistant Surgeon in the General Hospital, Ernakulam in 1949.

3. In 1958, the State Government framed the necessary rules for recruitment and appointment of Honorary Medical Officers and the petitioner applied for the same and was appointed in or about 1958 as Honorary Medical Officer, General Hospital, Ernakulam, which post she held till 20th September 1960.

4. The petitioners services were terminated by the memorandum dated 16th September 1960 issued by the second respondent and the said order is Ext. P2. The petitioner alleges that in consequence of that order, she stands removed from service.

5. The petitioner further alleges that certain interested persons have been very active to trump up false charges against her in order to get her removed from the General Hospital and the petitioner further claims to be aware that the said interested persons had sent various petitions to the authorities concerned making reckless and irresponsible allegations against her conduct as a doctor and about her services in the Hospital.

6. The petitioner refers to the editor of a local Malayalam paper as one who has been very active in that respect. The petitioner has filed various cuttings from the particular newspaper, the editor of which, according to her, is very much inimically disposed towards her. The petitioner further alleges that apart from making wide allegations against her, there are also attempts on the part of the said newspaper to compel the Director of Health Services to take action against the petitioner. But notwithstanding the very grave provocation, justifiable under such circumstances, the petitioner in order to observe decency and decorum and in view of her position as a Government doctor, ignored those allegations. Though she was under the impression that even the authorities concerned have simply ignored those allegations, she was served with an order terminating her services under Ext. P2.

7. The petitioner claims to be either a member of the civil service of the State or in the alternative, holding a civil post under the State. The petitioner refers to certain Government Orders which will justify her taking up the position that she is a member of the civil service of the State.

8. Further, the petitioner alleges that though the order terminating her services namely, Ext. P2 purports to be passed under R.5 of the Rules, dated 25th April 1958, it is in effect and in substance not a termination of the service under that rule, but it is a termination of her services by way of punishment. The petitioner alleges that the order is really the result of the decision arrived at by the Government to terminate her services, not under R.5, but because of the allegations stated to have been made against her; and the act of termination is really a measure of disciplinary proceedings. The petitioner has raised several grounds of attack against this order Ext. P2 According to her, she is entitled to protection afforded to a Government servant under Art.311 (2) of the Constitution and in this case, she has been removed from