https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282054 A rule made under Article 309 may validly operate retrospectively, and once the amended proviso to Rule 5(1) took effect from 1 May 1965, termination of temporary service after that date was governed by the amended rule without any separate validating provision. The challenge based on lack of prior notice pay therefore failed. The further objection under Article 14 and mala fides was also rejected because the termination was under the temporary service rules permitting termination without reasons, no discrimination was shown on the facts, and the later filling of the vacancy did not by itself establish improper motive. The termination was treated as legally sustainable. en-us Wed, 19 Mar 1975 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Jul 2019 16:27:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282054 A rule made under Article 309 may validly operate retrospectively, and once the amended proviso to Rule 5(1) took effect from 1 May 1965, termination of temporary service after that date was governed by the amended rule without any separate validating provision. The challenge based on lack of prior notice pay therefore failed. The further objection under Article 14 and mala fides was also rejected because the termination was under the temporary service rules permitting termination without reasons, no discrimination was shown on the facts, and the later filling of the vacancy did not by itself establish improper motive. The termination was treated as legally sustainable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 19 Mar 1975 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282054