Termination of transferred officers must follow the governing order's procedure; regulations cannot override the prescribed discharge framework.

Employees transferred to the Corporation retained their existing service conditions until altered under the Act and the governing order. The Central Government order under section 11(2) governed termination for the covered class, so the Corporation's regulations could not override clause 10 or create an independent power of discharge. Any termination had to follow the procedure in clause 10(a) or 10(b). In the individual case, the Corporation could not compel acceptance of a lower or different post; at most, remuneration could be fixed within the prescribed grade, with refusal attracting only the consequences contemplated by section 11(2).

---

---

Issues: Whether the termination of Development Officers' services could validly be made under the circular and regulations without complying with clause 10 of the governing order, and whether the alternative reliance on section 11(2) could sustain the termination in the case of the respondent who declined absorption on a lower administrative post.

Analysis: Under the statutory scheme, employees transferred to the Corporation continued on their existing terms until altered in accordance with the Act and the order made under it. The Central Government's order under section 11(2) occupied the field in respect of termination of service for the covered class of officers, and the Corporation's regulations could not override it. Paragraph 4(h) of the circular, even if read as indicating that services of unsuitable officers may be terminated, had to be reconciled with clause 10 of the order and could not confer an independent power of discharge. Where the order contemplated termination, it had to be effected only in the manner prescribed by clause 10(a) or clause 10(b). In the individual case of the respondent offered an assistant's post, the Corporation could not compel acceptance of a lower or different assignment; at most, the remuneration could be fixed within the prescribed grade, and refusal might then attract the consequences contemplated by section 11(2).

Conclusion: The termination orders were invalid because they were not made in accordance with clause 10 of the governing order, and the alternative justification under the circular or section 11(2) failed.

---