( 1. ) THE petitioner was a Tyre care taker employed in the m P. State Road Transport Corporation at its Morena Depot and held this post till 20-8-1975. On 5-4-1975, he was detected travelling without a ticket in bus No. 9295 belonging to the Corporation. On the same day, he was produced before the Mobile Court, Gwalior. The petitioner admitted his guilt and was convicted for having committed an offence punishable under section 6 of the M. P. Rajya Sadak Parivahan Seva (Bina Ticket Yatri Ki Rok) Adhiniyam, 1974 and sentanced to pay a fine of Rs. 10. 35, or in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of ten days.

( 2. ) THE Corporation, by its order dated 20-8-1975, accordingly terminated the services of the petitioner under Regulation 109 of the M. P. State Road transport Corporation Employees Service Regulations, 1964, which reads thus:

"109. Notwithstanding the provisions of Regulation 69, the services of an employee, if he has been convicted in a Criminal Court or has been declared insolvent by a competent Court, shall be liable to be terminated without notice. "

( 3. ) IN exercise of the powers conferred by section 45 of the Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950, the M. P. State Road Transport Corporation, with the previous sanction of the State Government, framed the Madhya Pradesh state Road Transport Corporation Employees Conduct, Discipline and Appeal regulations, 1975, which came into force on 5-9-1975. Regulations 36 to 40 provided for the procedure for imposing major penalties. Then comes Regulation 41, the material portion of which runs thus :

"41. Special procedure in certain cases.- Notwithstanding anything contained in Regulations 36 to 40- (i) Where the employee charged is a temporary employee or a probationer; (ii) Where the employee or a probationer; (iii) Where any penalty is sought to be imposed on an employee on the ground of conduct which has led to his conviction on a criminal charge; or. . . . . . . . " Regulation 43 (ii) confers a right of appeal to an employee against an order imposing any of the penalties specified in Regulation 32. Regulation 44 provides for constituting an appellate authority. Regulation 47 provides for the manner in which an appeal is to be dealt with and it reads:

"47. Consideration of appeal.- In the case of an appeal against an order imposing any of the penalties specified in Regulation 32 or enhancing any penalty imposed under the said Regulation, the appellate authority shall consider:- (A) Whether the procedure laid down in these regulations has been complied with, and, if not, whether such non-compliance has resulted in violation of any principle of natural justice, equity and good conscience or failure of justice; (B) Whether the findings of the competent authority are warranted by the evidence on record; and (C) Whether the penalty or the enhanced penalty imposed is adequate, inadequate, or severe; and pass orders,- (i) confirming, enhancing, reducing, or setting aside the penalty; or (ii) remitting the case to the authority which imposed the penalty or to any other authority with such direction as it may deem fit in the circumstances of the case: provided that :- (a) if the enhanced penalty which the appellate authority proposes to impose is one of the penalties specified in clauses (iv) to (ix) of regulation 32 and an inquiry under Regulation 36 has not already been held in the case, the appellate authority shall, subject to the provisions of Regulation 41, itself hold such enquiry or direct that such enquiry be held in accordance with the provisions of Regulation 36 and thereafter, on a consideration of the proceedings of such inquiry and after giving the appellant a reasonable opportunity, as far as may be, in accordance with the provisions of Regulation 37 of making a representation against the penalty proposed on the basis of the evidence adduced during such inquiry make such orders as it may deem fit; (b) If the enhanced penalty which the appellate