JUDGMENT

Delay condoned. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Leave granted.

3. This appeal arises from the order dated April 12, 1993 passed by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Bhubaneshwar, in TA No.50/90. Admittedly, the respondent was appointed as Director of Fisheries on August 12, 1971, on ad hoc basis. Thereafter, by order dated July 22, 1972, he was directed to continue temporarily until further orders. It would appear that the Government had taken policy decision to appoint an I.A.S. Officer to man the post of the Director, Fisheries. By Notification dated.March 18, 1977, the Government has reverted the respondent from the post of Director to the post of Joint Director. The respondent had voluntarily retired from service on 16-12-1977. The only controversy is whether the reversion of the respondent is valid in law. It is pointed out by Mr. J. R. Das, learned counsel for the respondent that the respondent was appointed after consultation and with the concurrence of the Public Service Commission. Therefore, his appointment must be deemed to be a regular appointment. Thereby without conducting an enquiry and an opportunity for misconduct, the reversion of the respondent