DHANANJAY vs CHIEF EXE.OFFICER,ZILLA PARISHAD,JALNA

The Supreme Court held that the termination of the appellant's services was not simpliciter but punitive, thus attaching stigma to him, despite being appointed temporarily under Rule 5(1) of the Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules. The Court emphasized that the nature of termination depends on the facts of each case, and in this instance, the prior suspension and the initiation of an enquiry indicated a punitive action rather than a mere termination. The Court ultimately set aside the High Court's dismissal of the writ petition, recognizing the need for a proper enquiry before termination.