M.KATJU
SATYA DEO MISHRA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Respondent
M. KATJU, J.
( 1 ) THIS writ petition has been filed against the impugned termination order dated March 16, 1988 (Annexure 3 to the writ petition ). I have heard Sri. B. N. Rai, learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.
( 2 ) THE petitioner was appointed temporarily on August 1, 1970 on the post of Agriculture teacher and joined his post on August 14. 1970 in Higher Secondary School, Singli, District pithoragarh. after having selected by the department. It is also stated in paragraph 2 of the writ petition that since then the petitioner has been continuously working on the said post with an unblemished record of service. He was thereafter transferred from place to place but was not regularised. It has also been stated in paragraph 6 of the petition that since juniors to the petitioners had been regularised, he made representations in 1985 and 1987 to the Additional director (Basic) to confirm him, but no action was taken. True copies of; his representations arc annexures-1 and 2. The petitioners service was terminated by the order dated March 16. 1988, true copy of which is Annexure-3 to the writ petition. Perusal of Annexure-3 shows that the only reason give
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.