A temporary Munsiff appointed under the U. P. Nyayik Sewa Niyamali, 1951, is governed by the U. P. Temporary Government Servants (Termination of Service) Rules, 1975, and his services can be terminated without assigning any reason.

Parties have exchanged affidavits and therefore, the writ petition is being disposed of finally at the admission stage.

2. The petitioner was appointed as a temporary Munsiff by the State Government dated August 9, 1995. The appointment order (Annexure 1 to the writ petition) is a long one and towards the end some conditions were mentioned. One of these was that he had been appointed as a Munsiff in a temporary capacity on the condition that till he was appointed as a Munsiff in substantive capacity, he would he governed by Notification No. 20/l-74-appointment-3 dated June 11, 1974 which are applicable to temporary employees. The Full Court passed a resolution on July 23, 1994 that haying regard to the work and conduct of the petitioner his service be dispensed with in accordance with the relevant service rules and a recommendation to that effect be made to the Governor. There after, the Governor of U. P. exercising powers under U. P. Temporary Government Servants (Termination of Service) Rules, 1975, passed on March 7, 1995 terminating the service of the petitioner w. e. f. the date of receipt of notice. The order further mentions that the petitioner would be entitled to a sum equivalent to the amount of his pay and other allowances for one month in lieu of notice. This order is impugned in the present petition,

3. The principal submission of S/sri Sudhir Chandra and Ravi Kant, learned counsel for the petitioner, is based on Rules 23 to 25 of U. P. Nyayik Sewa Niyamali, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) which have been framed by the Governor in exercise of powers conferred by Article 224 and proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution and in consultation with U. P. Public Service Commission and the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad and are applicable to Munsiffs and Civil Judges. Rule 23 provides that all candidates on appointment to the service shall be placed on proba tion for two years, provided that, in the recommendations of the court, the Governor may in special cases extend the period of probation. It further lays down that the order sanctioning any such extension of probation shall specify the exact date upto which extension is granted. Rule 24 provides that if it appears to the Governor at any time during or at the end of the period of probation or extended period of probation as the case may be that a probationer has not made sufficient use of his opportunities or has otherwise failed to give satisfaction, he may be reverted to his substantive post, if any, or if he does not hold a lien on any substantive post, his services may be dispensed with. It is urged that no order extending the period of probation was passed and therefore after expiry of period of two years, by operation of Rules 23 to 25 of the Rules, the petitioner acquired the status of a confirmed employee and his service could not be terminated by taking recourse to the power under U. P. Temporary Government Servants (Termination of Service) Rules, 1975. Reliance in support of this submission is placed upon State of Punjab v. Dharam Singh, AIR 1968 SC 1210 and Om Prakash Maurya v. U. P. Co-operative, and Sugar Factories Federation, AIR 1986 SC 1844.

4. The question to be considered is whether every appointment of a Munsiff will be governed by Rules 23 to 25 of the Rules or it is permissible to appoint a person on a purely temporary capacity to whom the aforesaid provisions will not apply. Rule 4 of the Rules gives the definitions and sub-rule (e) lays down that member of the Service means a person appointed in a substantive capacity under the provisions of these rules, or of the rules enforce previous to the introduction of these rules, to a post in the cadre of the service. Sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 provides that the strength of the service and of each kind of posts shall be determined by the Governor from time to time in consultation with the High Court and sub-rule (2) provides that the permanent strength of service and ea