TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the amendment to Rule 5(1) of the Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965 operated retrospectively so as to sustain the forthwith termination of the appellant's temporary service without prior payment of notice pay. (ii) Whether the termination was invalid on the grounds of Article 14 violation or mala fide action.
Issue (i): Whether the amendment to Rule 5(1) of the Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965 operated retrospectively so as to sustain the forthwith termination of the appellant's temporary service without prior payment of notice pay.
Analysis: The amended proviso to Rule 5(1) was expressly retrospective from 1 May 1965. Once the rule was given retrospective effect, actions taken after that date had to be judged under the rule as amended. Rules made under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India are legislative in character and may validly operate retrospectively. The termination in question was after the date from which the amendment took effect, and therefore it was not necessary to read into the rule any separate validating provision for the action taken against the appellant.
Conclusion: The retrospective amendment validly supported the appellant's termination, and the challenge on this ground failed.
Issue (ii): Whether the termination was invalid on the grounds of Article 14 violation or mala fide action.
Analysis: The termination was not on the basis of retrenchment, but under the relevant temporary service rules which permitted termination without assigning reasons. A claim of discrimination based on retention of juniors did not arise on these facts. The allegation of mala fides was unsupported, as the subsequent appointment of others to fill the vacancy did not by itself establish improper motive for the termination.
Conclusion: The challenge based on Article 14 and mala fides was rejected.
Final Conclusion: The termination of the appellant's temporary service was held to be legally sustainable, and no ground was found to warrant interference with the High Court's dismissal of the writ petition.
Ratio Decidendi: A statutory rule made under Article 309 of the Constitution of India may be given retrospective effect, and once so amended, actions taken after the operative date are judged under the amended rule without the need for a separate validating provision.
TaxTMI 
