( 1 ) DELAY condoned. Leave granted.

( 2 ) HEARD the learned counsel for the parties. The defendant is the appellant, against the judgment of the High court of Punjab and Haryana, dismissing the second appeal filed by the appellant and confirming the judgment of the lower appellate court. The plaintiff had filed a suit challenging the order of termination dated 8/1/1981, inter alia, on the ground that before issuance of the aforesaid order the plaintiff had no opportunity of being heard. The defendant-State Electricity Board had taken the stand in the written statement that the plaintiffs adjustment as Assistant Lineman was purely on ad hoc basis and when he was ordered to work as Charge I Mate, which is the substantive post, question of giving an opportunity of hearing does not arise. It was also stated that ever since he was posted as Charge I Mate he had remained absent and did not assume the charge. The learned trial court came to hold that the impugned order, strictly speaking, cannot be said to be an order terminating the services of the plaintiff from the Board and since the plaintiff was holding the post of Assistant Lineman on ad hoc basis against which post he had no righ