Judgement

VAIDIALINGAM, J.:- This appeal by the State of Haryana, the Chief Minister of the State and the Registrar Co-operative Societies, on Certificate is directed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Delhi dated September 18, 1969 allowing Civil Writ No. 851 of 1968 and quashing the order of the State Government dated October 31, 1968 terminating the services of the respondent.

2. Before we proceed to set out the facts leading up to the filing of the writ petition by the respondent, it is necessary to deal with a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the appeal that has been raised by Mr. M. K. Ramamurthy, learned counsel for the respondent. The objection is that the order dated October 31 1968 terminating the services of the respondent, which was queashed by the High Court and which order again is sought to be canvassed in the appeal has been cancelled by the State on December 5, 1969. In consequence if the latter order, the counsel pointed out, respondent has been reinstated in service. It is the contention of Mr. M. K. Ramamurthy that in view of the fact that the officer has now been reinstated in service, the question of the validity of the original order passed on October 31, 1968 terminating the services of the respondent no longer survives for consideration in this appeal.

3. This preliminary objection has been contested by Mr. V. N. Tarkunde, learned counsel for the appellants.

4. We are satisfied that the preliminary objection, raised on behalf of the respondent, to the maintainability of the appeal, cannot be sustained for the reasons stated below. The order of termination was passed on October 31, 1968. The respondent filed Civil Writ No. 851 of 1968, before the High Court, challenging the said order. The judgment of the High Court setting aside the said order and allowing the writ petition was rendered on September 18, 1969. It is no doubt true that on December 5. 1969, the State Government passed an order cancelling the previons order of termination deted October 31, 1968 and posted the respondent as Deputy Director (Publicity) at Narnaul. The said order further directed the payment to the respondent full pay and allowances that he would have been entitled. if his services had not been terminated. But there is a very significant recital in the order to the effect that the State is cancelling the previous order deted October 31, 1968, in view of the acceptance by the High Court of the writ petition filed by the respondent. A copy of the order dated December 5, 1969, was also forwarded by the Government to the Assistant Registrar of the High Court of Delhi.

5. The State filed on December 19, 1969 an application S. C. A. No. 1 of 1970 in the High Court praying for grant of certificate to enable the State to file an appeal in this Court against the decision in Civil Writ No. 851 of 1968. On the next day, i.e. December 20, 1959 the State filed a petition C. M. No. 15 of 1970 in S. C. A. No. 1 of 1970 praying for restraining the respondent from claiming arrears of salary and allowances for the period he was out of service October 31, 1968 or in the alternative to direct the respondent to furnish sufficient bank guarantee before recovering those amounts from the State. This request was made to enure till the disposal of the application filed by the State for grant of certificate. Both in the petition C. M. No. 15 of 1970 as well as in the affidavit filed in support thereof, it was specifically mentioned that the copy of the judgment of the High Court was received by the Chief Secretary to the Government on November 25, 1969 and that in compliance with the judgment of the High Court, the respondent had been posted as Deputy Director (Publicity) at Narnaul by order dated December 5, 1969. A copy of this order was also annexed to the petition. it was further stated that the amount payable to the respondent being very large, there will be considerable difficulty in obtaining restitution in case the ju