The word "subordinate" occurring in Article 311 (1) of the Constitution has reference to subordination in rank and not subordination in respect of powers and duties.

NARASIMHAM, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution against the order of the Deputy Commissioner, Sambalpur, No. 4134 dated 22-11-56 dismissing the petitioner from Government service. An appeal was filed before the State government which was unsuccessful.

( 2 ) THE petitioner entered the office of the Deputy Commissioner, Sambalpur in a clerical capacity and was, in due course confirmed in that post. On 4 7-47 he was appointed Inspector of Supplies (Enforcement) with retrospective effect from 24th march 1947 by an order signed by the Assistant Secretary to the Government of Orissa in the Department of Supply and Transport (See annexure A ). He was however attached to the Supply Branch of the Office of the Deputy Commissioner at Sambalpur. On 28-5-51 proceedings were drawn up against him in respect of 8 charges (Annexure B) and he was called upon to show cause why suitable disciplinary action may not be taken against him. He showed cause but without holding a regular enquiry the Deputy Commissioner passed an order on 30-10-51 dismissing him from service (Annexure E ). The petitioner then pointed out to the Deputy commissioner the irregularity in the conduct of the proceedings and requested him to reconsider his order. But the Deputy Commissioner declined to accede to his prayer (see annexure J ). Then the petitioner appealed to Government in the supply Department on 30-4-52 (annexure K) who noticed the irregularity in the proceedings and suggested to the Deputy Commissioner to regularise the matter by following the departmental rules relating to conduct of disciplinary proceedings against Government servants. The actual order and the date on which the order was passed are not on record. But in the counter affidavit of the Deputy commissioner of Sambalpur (in paragraph 7) this fact was mentioned and not controverted. Moreover, when on receipt of the Government Order the Deputy commissioner tried to regularise the matter (see annexure U), he made a reference to Government of Orissa Supply Department's letter No. 27044 dated 110-53. It may therefore be taken as well established that sometime after October 1953 the Deputy Commissioner, on the advice of the Secretary, Supply department decided to draw up proceedings afresh against the petitioner. But as the previous order of dismissal had not been formally bet aside by the superior authority and no fresh proceedings could be drawn up against a person already dismissed the Deputy Commissioner by his order dated 20-10-53 (annexure U)modified his previous order of dismissal to one of suspension from 5-11-51. Against this order also it was pointed out that there could be no retrospective order of suspension. Thereupon, by his subsequent order dated 11-11-54 (annexure Y) he partially modified his earlier order and directed that the petitioner shall be deemed to be absent from duty from 26-10-53 till the completion of the departmental proceeding. It may therefore be taken as unchallenged that the original order of dismissal dated 30-10-51 was modified to one of absence from duty till 25-10-53 and suspension from 25-10-53. Then on 30-11-53 (Ann. W) the deputy Commissioner enclosed a copy of the charges against the petitioner together with enquiry report of one Mr. K. P. Dutta, Civil Supply Officer, Sambalpur and informed the petitioner that if he wished to be heard in person the Deputy commissioner would be glad to see him on 10-12-53. The exact date on which Mr. K. P. Dutta conducted the enquiry against the petitioner is not on record, though the petitioner himself had filed a copy of his report along with Annexure W. But apparently the enquiry must have been held sometime before 30-11-53 and sometime after the receipt of Government Orders asking the Deputy Commissioner to regularise the entire proceeding. It is not alleged either in the application under Article 226 or in the subsequent show cause petition filed by the petitioner before the Deputy Commi