As per case facts, the Petitioner, a registered Sri Lankan refugee, was appointed as an Officer in a bank. Later, during document scrutiny for permanent absorption, her services were terminated ... because she was not an Indian citizen, a requirement stated in the original advertisement. The Petitioner, who came to India as a child, has resided legally and has family ties, including an Indian spouse and children. She had been continuously serving due to an interim court Order. The question arose whether terminating the services of a non-citizen, legally residing and employed, solely based on nationality despite her long service, satisfactory performance, and family ties, is arbitrary and violates Article 14 of the Constitution. Finally, the High Court held that a non-citizen can invoke writ jurisdiction for Article 14 violations. It found the Petitioner's termination arbitrary and discriminatory, given her lawful residence under an exemption order, continuous service, performance, and family situation. The Court quashed the termination Order, noting that the Bank's general power to restrict employment to citizens was not adjudicated, and this Order was based on specific facts.