Jawahar Lal Gupta, J.

1. The petitioner who was employed as a Labour Inspector on February 27, 1989, complains that his services were illegally terminated vide order dated August 7, 1991. It is alleged that various other persons had been appointed on purely adhoc basis after terminating the petitioners services. This, according to the petitioner, is arbitrary and violative of the rule enunciated by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Piara Singh, (1992-2) 102 P.L.R. 647 (S.C.). It is further submitted that the action is also violative of the provisions of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution in as much as one Mr. Shiv Kumar Saini who had been appointed on purely adhoc basis on April 10, 1989, is still continuing in service. According to the petitioner, the termination of the services of a senior while his junior is allowed to continue is discriminatory and cannot be sustained. The petitioner prays for the quashing of the order of termination and for a direction to the respondents to retain him in service.

2. The respondents have controverted the petitioners claim. It has been pointed out that the petitioner has deliberately concealed material facts