https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189654 The court concluded that the appellant's quasi-permanent status as a Public Relations Officer did not extend to the post of Assistant Station Director due to different grades/cadres. The termination based on posts' reduction was justified. The orders terminating service were valid, not violating Article 311. Lack of consultation with UPSC invalidated quasi-permanent status declaration. As the appellant had no right to the ASD post, Article 311 protection didn't apply. The government was not estopped from termination. Dissenting, BOSE J. advocated for equity, allowing the appellant to retain ASD status. Majority dismissed the appeal, urging sympathetic consideration. en-us Tue, 18 Feb 1958 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 16 Jan 2017 16:23:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189654 The court concluded that the appellant's quasi-permanent status as a Public Relations Officer did not extend to the post of Assistant Station Director due to different grades/cadres. The termination based on posts' reduction was justified. The orders terminating service were valid, not violating Article 311. Lack of consultation with UPSC invalidated quasi-permanent status declaration. As the appellant had no right to the ASD post, Article 311 protection didn't apply. The government was not estopped from termination. Dissenting, BOSE J. advocated for equity, allowing the appellant to retain ASD status. Majority dismissed the appeal, urging sympathetic consideration. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 18 Feb 1958 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189654