https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169719 A temporary Government servant whose engagement was governed by a fresh temporary contract and the Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1949 could be terminated on one month's notice under Rule 5. The Court held that such discharge was a contractual termination, not dismissal, removal or reduction in rank, and therefore Article 311 was not attracted. It further held that no violation of Articles 14 or 16(1) was shown because the employee was treated in accordance with the same terms applicable to other temporary appointees. The petition consequently failed, and no fundamental right was found to be infringed. en-us Fri, 13 Mar 1953 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 May 2015 16:53:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169719 A temporary Government servant whose engagement was governed by a fresh temporary contract and the Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1949 could be terminated on one month's notice under Rule 5. The Court held that such discharge was a contractual termination, not dismissal, removal or reduction in rank, and therefore Article 311 was not attracted. It further held that no violation of Articles 14 or 16(1) was shown because the employee was treated in accordance with the same terms applicable to other temporary appointees. The petition consequently failed, and no fundamental right was found to be infringed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 13 Mar 1953 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169719