https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168892 Special service rules framed to safeguard national security were upheld as a valid classification under Article 14, because they applied only to railway servants reasonably suspected of subversive activities and used sufficiently definite language. The termination of service under those rules was held not to infringe Article 19(1)(c), since it did not restrict the employees' right to remain Communists or trade unionists. Article 311 was also not attracted because the terminations were not punitive dismissals or removals, and accrued benefits were preserved. The challenge based on retrospectivity failed because the rules operated prospectively, even though antecedent conduct could be relied on to form the required opinion. The orders were held to have been made by the competent authority. en-us Tue, 03 Dec 1957 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 Apr 2015 17:43:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168892 Special service rules framed to safeguard national security were upheld as a valid classification under Article 14, because they applied only to railway servants reasonably suspected of subversive activities and used sufficiently definite language. The termination of service under those rules was held not to infringe Article 19(1)(c), since it did not restrict the employees' right to remain Communists or trade unionists. Article 311 was also not attracted because the terminations were not punitive dismissals or removals, and accrued benefits were preserved. The challenge based on retrospectivity failed because the rules operated prospectively, even though antecedent conduct could be relied on to form the required opinion. The orders were held to have been made by the competent authority. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 03 Dec 1957 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168892