JUDGMENT P. Govindan Nair, J. 1. No reason at all was as much as alleged, far less shown, why the appellant chose to terminate the respondent's services under R.3 of the Central Civil Service (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965, such as that it was administratively convenient to do so, or that the respondent's work or conduct was unsatisfactory or again (what was admittedly not the case here) that it was a case of retrenchment and the respondent was chosen for some relevant reason such as that he was the junior most. The learned single judge was therefore quite right in holding that the appellant's action was violative of Art.16 of the Constitution and it seems to us that Champaklal v Union of India AIR 1964 SC 1854 fully supports this stand. 2. Appeal dismissed.