undertaken pursuant to letter dated 26.07.2012 of the Principal Secretary to the Governor, consequent upon enquiry conducted by OSD to the Governor, however, it is an admitted position that the termination order is not based upon the enquiry report dated 19.04.2012 submitted by OSD to the Governor. The findings recorded by the learned Single Judge that in course of enquiry by One Man Judicial Enquiry Commission, no notice was issued to the respondents has not been challenged in the present proceeding. The judgments in “Mohd. Sartaj & Anr. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.” (2006) 2 SCC 315 and “Ashok Kumar Sonkar Vs. Union of India & Ors.” (2007) 4 SCC 54 relied upon by Shri M.S. Anwar, the learned Senior Counsel for the appellant-University, in absence of materials conclusively establishing that the respondents do not possess requisite qualification for appointment, are not attracted in the present case. The plea that respondents' appointment being purely temporary and liable to be terminated on one month's notice, and hence there was no need to issue a show-cause notice to them, must fail in view of the position taken by the appellants that termination letter dated 13.06.2014 was issued in the light of the findings of illegality recorded by One Man Judicial Enquiry Commission. This is not a case of termination simpliciter of probation which may not require adherence to the rules of natural justice. This also cannot be ignored that the learned Single Judge was careful enough not to comment upon the legality of the appointments rather, it has been specifically made clear that the
