Raja Azlan Shah J:

This is an application for leave to apply for an order of certiorari to quash the decision of the Public Services Commission terminating the appointment of the applicant as a temporary enforcement officer in the road transport department. In the alternative, to ask for leave for enlargement of time to make the application.

The procedure in applying for an order of certiorari is well settled in the United Kingdom. Unfortunately, no provisions exist in our Rules of the Supreme Court to entertain such an application. However, O. 1 r. 2 of the Rules of the Supreme Court permits us to resort to the procedure adopted in the High Court of Justice in England. Order 59 r. 3 of the English Rules of the Supreme Court, 1883, provides:

(1) No application for an order of mandamus, prohibition or certiorari shall be made unless leave therefor has been granted in accordance with this rule.

Order 59 r. 4 provides:

(2) Leave shall not be granted to apply for an order of certiorari to remove any judgment, order, conviction or other proceeding for the purpose of its being quashed, unless the application for leave is made not later than six months after the date of the proceeding or such shorter period an may be prescribed by any enactment; and where the proceeding is subject to appeal and a time is limited by law for the bringing of the appeal, the Court or Judge may adjourn the application for leave until the appeal is determined or the time for appealing has expired.

It is necessary to go briefly into the facts of this case in order to consider the application. Pursuant to an offer of appointment by the Public Services Commission, the applicant was appointed as a temporary enforcement officer in the road transport department on 4 December 1961. The offer of appointment, among other things, states:

I am directed to inform you that on behalf of the Government of the Federation of Malaya, the Public Services Commission is pleased to offer you appointment as

Temporary Enforcement Officer, Road Transport Department, Federation of Malaya,

on a salary of $605 per mensem on the scale $605 x 23 - 835 with effect from the date of assumption of duty following the acceptance of this offer.

2. This is offer is subject to the following conditions:

(d) That during the first year of the period of your appointment, your services would be terminable at any time with one month's notice or one month's salary plus cost of living allowance in lieu, and without any reason being given. You would also be free to relinquish your appointment by giving one month's notice or one month's salary in lieu plus cost of living allowance. During the rest of your period of appointment, the appropriate notice required for both parties would be three months or one month's salary in lieu plus cost of living allowance.

3. The appointment offered is temporary.

On 10 August 1964, the Acting Registrar and Inspector of Motor Vehicles, Pahang, Raub, handed to the applicant, who I shall presume to be stationed at Raub at that time, a letter dated 4 August 1964, from the Public Services Commission, which reads as follows:

I am directed to inform you that in accordance with para. 2(d) of the offer of appointment as temporary enforcement officer in the road transport department made vide PSC. R/34/15 dated 21hb. November 1961, and which you have accepted the Commission has decided to terminate your services by payment of one month's salary and Cola in lieu of notice.

The applicant appealed to the Public Services Commission to let him know the reasons why his service was terminated without notice. There was an exchange of letters between the applicant and the Public Services Commission, and on 9 August 1965, the present application was made.

It is admitted by Counsel for the applicant that the course of action arose on 10 August 1964, and consequently his application which was dated 9 August 1965 is caught within the ambit of O. 59 r. 3, that is to say