Arbitrary termination power under service regulations violated Article 14 and could not survive constitutional scrutiny.

Regulation 34 of the West Bengal State Electricity Board Regulations conferred an unguided power to terminate a permanent employee on three months' notice or salary in lieu, without reasons or procedural safeguards. The Supreme Court treated this as arbitrary State action, noting that the provision created a discriminatory distinction from Regulation 33 and amounted to an impermissible "hire and fire" power inconsistent with Article 14 and basic fairness in employment termination. Regulation 34 was therefore invalid, and the termination order could not stand.

---

---

Issues: Whether Regulation 34 of the West Bengal State Electricity Board Regulations, empowering termination of a permanent employee by three months' notice or salary in lieu thereof without reasons, was arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

Analysis: Regulation 34 conferred an unguided and unrestricted power to terminate the services of a permanent employee without any reason or procedural safeguard. In contrast with Regulation 33, it created an arbitrary distinction and was capable of discriminatory exercise. The presence of provisions in the Electricity Supply Act did not supply sufficient checks to save such a naked 'hire and fire' power. The impugned power was inconsistent with the constitutional prohibition against arbitrary State action and with the basic requirements of fairness in employment termination.

Conclusion: Regulation 34 was held to be invalid as offending Article 14, and the order terminating the respondent's services was liable to be set aside. The appeal failed.

---