https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103422 The court found the writ petition maintainable as the respondent, ANIIDCO, was considered an instrumentality of the State under Article 12. It ruled the termination of the petitioner's employment as illegal due to lack of procedural fairness and violation of principles of natural justice. ANIIDCO's authority was subject to constitutional scrutiny, and the clause allowing arbitrary termination was deemed contrary to constitutional principles. The court set aside the termination, reinstated the petitioner with full benefits, and declared continuous service without interruption. en-us Tue, 13 May 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 22 Feb 2012 17:40:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103422 The court found the writ petition maintainable as the respondent, ANIIDCO, was considered an instrumentality of the State under Article 12. It ruled the termination of the petitioner's employment as illegal due to lack of procedural fairness and violation of principles of natural justice. ANIIDCO's authority was subject to constitutional scrutiny, and the clause allowing arbitrary termination was deemed contrary to constitutional principles. The court set aside the termination, reinstated the petitioner with full benefits, and declared continuous service without interruption. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 13 May 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103422