Judgment :- The petitioner was working as a Junior Superintendent in the service of the first respondent's company which is a fully owned Government company. He was promoted to that post as per Ext. P1 with effect from 1-1-1979. Ext. P2 is the approved standing order applicable to the company. While serving in the services of the company, on 5-12-1987 the petitioner was served with a show cause notice alleging certain misconduct as per clause 12(p) of the standing order. Thereafter, on 31-12-1987 another show cause notice was issued to the petitioner alleging violation of clause 12(c) of the standing order. On receipt of show cause notice the petitioner submitted explanation on 8-12-1987 and on 2-1-1988. On receipt of the explanation the management company conducted a domestic enquiry in which the petitioner was given an opportunity to participate. The petitioner was given the option of the assistance of a co-employee as against his wish to have the assistance of senior assistant to present Ms case which was objected to by the management before the enquiry officer. In the absence of a co-employee to represent his case the petitioner had to present his case personally without any outside assistance. Pursuant to the domestic enquiry the petitioner was found guilty of the charges levelled against him. Ext. P3 is the enquiry report. Based on the findings contained in the enquiry report the petitioner was dismissed from service as per Ext. P4 proceedings of the Managing Director of the company. Aggrieved by Ext. P4 the petitioner filed Ext. P5 appeal before the Board of Directors of the company. Since no orders were passed on Ext. P5 appeal, the Petitioner approached this court in O.P. No. 7322/89 which was disposed of by this court as per Ext. P6 judgment directing "mat the first respondent shall consider Ext. P2 appeal and pass appropriate orders within a period not exceeding six weeks from today. The first respondent shall arrange to convene a meeting for this purpose so as to enable the Board to pass final orders as directed above". Subsequent to the judgment of this court evidenced by Ext. P6 judgment directing "mat the first respondent shall consider Ext. P2 appeal and pass appropriate orders within a period not exceeding six weeks from today. The first respondent shall arrange to convene a meeting for this purpose so as to enable the Board to pass final orders as directed above". Subsequent to the judgment of this court evidenced by Ext. P6, orders were passed by the company on the appeal petition filed by the petitioner holding that in the case of disciplinary action taken by the Managing Director, there is no provision for appeal on the original orders of the Managing Director as per the Standing Order applicable to the Managerial Personnel of the company and hence Board has no jurisdiction to hear the appeal made by the dismissed officer. Therefore, the order awarding punishment of your dismissal from company's service is absolute". 3. The prayer in this original petition is for the issuance of a writ of certiorari to quash Ext. P3 enquiry report and Ext. P4 order of dismissal and Ext. P7 proceedings of the company dismissing the appeal and for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the company to reinstate the petitioner in service and for other incidental reliefs. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the respondents, I am of the view that the petitioner is not entitled to succeed in this original petition. It is trite law that an aggrieved person cannot exercise a right of appeal to a superior body unless such aright is conferred by law, rule or the standing order, as the case may be. In other words, there cannot be an automatic right of appeal, in the absence of such a right being conferred by the statute or by any oilier enabling provision. Admittedly, Ext. P2 is the true copy of the standing order governing the petitioner. The petitioner is not in a position to point out any provision in Ext. P2 standing order which confers on him a right of appeal against the decision of the Managing Director to the Board of Directors. In the absence of a right of appeal being conferred by Ext. P2 standing order, the respondents cannot be faulted for dismiss the appeal filed by the petitioner to the Board of Directors of the Company as not maintainable. Therefore, I do not find any infirmity in Ext. In the absence of a right of appeal being conferred by Ext. P2 standing order, the respondents cannot be faulted for dismiss the appeal filed by the petitioner to the Board of Directors of the Company as not maintainable. Therefore, I do not find any infirmity in Ext. P7 order dismissing the appeal as not maintainable. 5. There is yet another aspect to be noted in this connection. The petitioner is admittedly a managerial employee. The question then to be considered is what remedy, if any he can avail of in the event of his services being illegally terminated. It is settled law that a contract of personnel service cannot be specifically enforced and a court will be loathe to give a declaration mat the contract subsists and the employee deemed to be in service notwithstanding termination. This rule is however subject to three well recognised exceptions: (i) where a public servant is sought to be removed from service in contravention of the provisions of Art.311 of the Constitution of India; (ii) where a worker is sought to be reinstated on being dismissed under the Industrial law; and (ii) where a statutory body acts in breach or violation of the mandatory provisions of the statute. The petitioner does not belong to any of the above three categories. He is not a government servant nor is he a worker under Industrial law nor an employee under a statutory authority. Therefore, the remedy, if any, available to the petitioner is to move the appropriate civil court in a suit for damages for wrongful termination of service, if so advised. 6. In the above view of the mailer, I find not merit in thus original petition which is accordingly dismissed. There will be no order as to costs. The amount ordered to be disbursed as per Exl. P7 shall be paid to the petitioner imperiously.