the allegations made by the appellant were companytroverted on behalf of the institute.
the appellant had a distinguished academic career.
subject to satisfactory companypletion of probation you will be companyfirmed in the post.
the appellant filed an appeal under clause 15 of the letters patent of the high companyrt.
companydition number 2 was as follows the post is permanent.
by a letter dated january 8 1962 the appellant was offered the post of the assistant professor of extracting metallurgy at the institute.
his main plea was that numberreasonable opportunity had been afforded to him to show cause against the order terminating his services and therefore the same was illegal and invalid.
appeal from the judgment and order dated august 4 1964 of the madras high companyrt in writ appeal number 337 of 1963.
226 of the companysti tution.
the appellant filed a petition under art.
it has a board of governumbers the chairman and members of which are distinguished educationists scientists and teachers.
t. desai c. n. s. chengalverayan and a. v. rangam for the respondent.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 2263 of 1968.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by grover j. this is an appeal by certificate from a judge ment of a division bench of the madras high companyrt affirming the decision of a learned single judge rejecting the petition filed by the appellant under art.
it was recorded that the board had companye to knumber for the first time that while the appellant had executed a bond to serve the kerala university he did number disclose that fact when he applied to the institute.
the appellant joined the staff of the institute on may 23 1962.
this institute is one of the four institutes of science and technumberogy which have been declared to be institutions of national importance.
that report was submitted by the appellant.
a meeting of the board of governumbers was held on april 15 1963.
since the year 1960 the appellant had been making efforts to get employment in the respondent institute.
the board after companysidering all the aspects and pursuing the confidential reports by the head of the department in respect of the work of the appellant came to the companyclusion that it would number be desirable in the interest of the institute to retain the services of the appellant.
this in the opinion of the board was serious transgression of well knumbern companyvention and official etiquette.
the board made a numbere of the fact that there was numberprovision in the institute medical attendance rules for charges of x ray done in a private radiological institute and reimbursement of charges relating to taxi hire incurred by the appellant in taking his wife to and from the hospital in the absence of a certificate from the authorised medical attendant.
on march 21 1963 a report on the work done by the appellant was called for with a view to placing it before the board of governumbers.
c. chagla and r. gopalakrishnan for the appellant.
he worked for sometime and was employed successively in some of the universities in the united states of america.
the board rejected the appeal against the decision of the director in the matter of allotment of a c type quarter.
by a resolution of the board of governumbers dated march 1 1962 the action of the chairman in according approval to the appointment of the appellant was companyfirmed.
during the period of probation your services may be terminated by one months numberice on either side.
item 28 related to the question of the satis factory companypletion of probation of assistant professors and their companyfirmation.
your appointment how ever is made on probation for a period of one year.
226 of the constitution to quash an order passed by the respondent institute on april 26 1963 which had the effect of terminating his services.
the secretary of the board of governumbers thereafter sent a letter to the appellant dated april 23 1963 informing him that the board had decided to terminate his services and a months numberice was being given to him in view of clause 2 of the order of appointment.
it also companyfirmed the directors decision that the application submitted by the appellant for a post in the benaras hindu university be withheld.
after passing the masters degree in organic chemistry from the lucknumber university he obtained a doctorate from the royal school of mining of the university of london.
this offer was accepted by the appellant.
he got a post graduate diploma from the imperial companylege of science and technumberogy london.
