http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 3  

PETITIONER: UNION OF INDIA

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: M.A. CHOWDHARY

DATE OF JUDGMENT07/05/1987

BENCH: VENKATARAMIAH, E.S. (J) BENCH: VENKATARAMIAH, E.S. (J) DUTT, M.M. (J)

CITATION:  1987 AIR 1526            1987 SCR  (3) 424  1987 SCC  (4) 112        1987 SCALE  (1)1254  CITATOR INFO :  F          1988 SC1970  (7)  R          1990 SC1720  (6)

ACT:     Constitution    of    India--Article     311--Protection of--Whether available to staff artists of All India Radio.

HEADNOTE:     The  respondent was appointed as a staff artist  in  the All  India  Radio under an agreement on contract  basis.  On November  2,  1967 the Government of India passed  an  order stating  that staff artists should be allowed to  remain  in service  upto the age of 55 years and accordingly  a  clause was  added  to  the agreement executed  by  the  respondent. Clause  4(v)  of  the agreement however  provided  that  the respondent’s service will be liable to be terminated on  six months  notice on either side. On October 5, 1970  a  notice was  issued to the respondent intimating  that  his-services would stand terminated on the expiry of six months from  the date of that notice. The respondent challenged the  validity of  the  termination notice by a writ  petition.  A  learned Single Judge of the High Court and the Division Bench of the High Court found that the post of staff artists held by  the respondent was a ’civil post’ within the meaning of  Article 311(1) of the Constitution and had the protection of Article 311.  Though  the authority to  terminate  the  respondent’s service  emanated from the contract but nevertheless it  has the effect of violating Article 311(1) of the  Constitution. The  notice  of  termination was found void as  it  did  not comply with Article 311(2). Hence this appeal. Agreeing  with  the High Court dismissing  the  appeal  this Court,     HELD: That the staff artists of the All India Radio hold civil  posts  under the Government and Article  311  of  the Constitution is applicable to them. [426F]

JUDGMENT:     CIVIL  APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No.  384  of 1977.     From  the  Judgment and Order dated  18.11.1974  of  the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 3  

Allahabad High Court in Special Appeal No. 258 of 1974. A.K. Ganguli, R.P. Srivastava, P Parmeswaran and Miss. A. 425 Subhashini for the Appellant. Mrs. Rani Chhabra for the Respondent. The following Order of the Court was delivered: SUPREME COURT EDITORIAL NOTE: Facts of the case:     The  respondent-M.A. Chowdhary was appointed as a  Staff Artist in All India Radio, Bombay under an agreement execut- ed by him with the Director General of All India Radio.  The agreement was for three years. On the expiry of three years, the respondent was re-employed and his contract was  renewed on yearly basis up to 30th November, 1964. Thereafter he was re-employed on a five years’ contract.     On  November 2, 1967 the Government of India  passed  an order stating that Staff Artists should be allowed to remain in  service upto the age of 55 years. Accordingly, a  clause was  added  to  the agreement executed  by  the  respondent, stipulating that the respondent shall remain in service upto December 31, 1985 on which date he was to attain the age  of 55  years. Clause 4(v) of the agreement,  however,  provided that the respondent’s service will be liable to be terminat- ed on 6 months’ notice on either side.     In  due  course, the respondent was transferred  to  All India Radio, Varanasi. The Assistant Station Director of All India  Radio,  Varanasi issued a notice dated  5th  October, 1970 intimating the respondent that his services would stand terminated on the expiry of 6 months from 5th October,  1970 in accordance with clause 4(v) of the agreement.     The respondent challenged the validity of the  aforesaid termination notice by Writ Petition filed in the High  Court of  Allahabad.  The learned Single Judge  held  that  having regard  to the service conditions, it must be held that  the respondent  was  holding  a ’civil post’, and  as  such  was entitled to the protection of Articles 311(2) and 16 of  the Constitution, and that inasmuch as persons junior to him had been retained in service, the Appointing Authority in termi- nating his services had violated Article 16 of the Constitu- tion.  On  these grounds, the notice of termination  of  the respondent’s service was held bad and quashed. 426     In  appeal,  the  Division Bench held that  in  view  of clauses (1) to (4) of the Agreement it is apparent that  the Government  in consideration of a monthly  salary,  controls the nature and manner of work assigned to the staff artists, that  the Government had complete control over the  respond- ent’s  work and manner and method of doing the  work,  which was supervised by the higher authorities, that the relation- ship between the respondent and the appellant was clearly of a  master  and servant, and the respondent  was,  therefore; holding a ’civil post’ within the meaning of Article  311(1) of the Constitution. The authority to terminate the respond- ent’s service on 6 months’ notice emanated from the contract but  nonetheless  it  has the effect  of  violating  Article 311(1)  of  the Constitution. It must  comply  with  Article 311(2),  otherwise the termination would be a  removal  from service  within the meaning of Article 311(2) and in  viola- tion  of  its provisions. The Division Bench held  that  the notice  of termination was void and rightly quashed  by  the learned  Single Judge and dismissed the appeal of the  Union of India. ORDER     Shri  A.K.  Ganguli, Learned Counsel for  the  Union  of India  submits that Article 311 of the Constitution  is  ap- plicable to the Staff Artists of the All India Radio. We are

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 3  

of the view that the statement made on behalf of the Govern- ment  represents the true legal position because  the  Staff Artists  are  holding civil posts under the  Government.  In view  of the above statement, this appeal filed against  the judgment  of the High Court of Allahabad in  Special  Appeal No.  258 of 1974 which has also taken the view that  article 311  is  applicable to those Staff Artists has  to  be  dis- missed. This appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs. H.S.K.                                          Appeal  dis- missed. ?427