(1) LEAVE granted. We have heard both the counsel.

(2) WE are satisfied on the facts that it is a fit case for interference. The first respondent - Rajendra Bahadur Srivastava was appointed as a lower division clerk on 15/1 1/1966. He was promoted as an upper division assistant in the year 1970. By proceedings dated 31/12/1971 his services were terminated with immediate effect on payment of one month salary in lieu of notice. Thereafter, on 7/9/1977 he submitted a representation to the authorities. On 20/9/1977 the Housing Commissioner and secretary had stipulated in his order that the respondent should give consent for his appointment afresh and subject to that his case would be considered. Accordingly, the first respondent has submitted a consent letter (Annexure V to the Special Leave Petition paper-book) which reads thus :

"IN pursuance of the D.O. dated 7/9/1977 mentioned in the said letter I give my consent subject to the conditions contained therein, that my service tenure would start afresh and will not claim benefits of my past services. My joining w.e.f. 3/5/1986 may kindly be accepted."

(3) PURSUANT to that, it was treated that he had joined on