UNION OF INDIA versus M.A. CHOWDHARY

Citation: [1987] 3 S.C.R. 424 · Decided: 07-05-1987 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: E.S. VENKATARAMIAH, M.M. DUTT · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
UNION OF INDIA 
v. 
M.A. CHOWDHARY 
MAY 7, 1987 
B 
[E.S. VENKATARAMIAH AND M.M. DUTT, JJ.) 
Constitution of India-Article 311-Protection of-Whether A 
available to staff artists of All India Radio. 
The respondent was appointed as a staff artist in the All India 
C 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 hi service upto the age of SS 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 
D October S, 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 Y 
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 
E 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 violat-
ing 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. 
F 
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] 
G 
CNIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 384r.'")' 
of 1977. 
.· ... 
' 
From the Judgment and Order dated 18.11.1974 of the Allaha- • 
· 
bad High Court in Special Appeal No. 258 of 1974. 
H 
A.K. Ganguli, R.P. Srivastava, P. Parmeswaran and Miss. A. 
424 
"'
U.0.1. v. M.A. CHOWDHARY 
425 
• ...4_ 
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 executed by 
him with the Director General of All India Radio. The agreement was 
A 
H 
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 c 
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 D 
y executed by the respondent, stipulating that the respondent shall re-
main in service upto December 31, 1985 on which date he was to attain 
the age of 55 years. Clause 4(v) of tpe agreement, however, provided 
that the respondent's service will be liable to be terminated on 6 
months' notice on either side. 
In due course, the respondent was transferred to All India 
E 
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. 
F 
The respondent challenged the validity of the aforesaid termina-
tion 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 prot.ection of Articles 311(2) and 16 of the 
G 
.. 
, onstitution, and that inasmuch as persons junior to him had been 
· 
· · retained in service, the Appointing Authority in terminating his 
services had violated Article 16 of the Constitution. On these grounds, 
the notice of termination of the respondent's service was held bad and 
quashed. 
H 
•
- ·-- --
A 
l!I 
c 
D 
426 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1987] 3.S.C.R. 
In appeal, the Division Bench held that in view of clauses (1) to ·"' 
( 4) of the Agreement it is apparent that the Government in considera-
tion of a monthly salary, controls the nature and manner of work 
assigned to the staff artists, that the Government had com

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.