MARKANDEY KATJU, UMESHWAR PANDEY
State Urban Development Agency – Appellant
Versus
Dinesh Chandra Saxena – Respondent
( 1 ) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
( 2 ) THIS special appeal has been filed against the impugned interim order of the learned single Judge dated July 16, 2004 in writ petition No. 26317 of 2004.
( 3 ) IT appears that the respondents were employees of the U. P. State Handloom corporation and they had been sent on deputation to the State Urban Development agency. They were retrenched from their parent department, that is U. P. State Handloom corporation. As a consequence, their services were also terminated in the State Urban development Agency where they had been sent on deputation.
( 4 ) BY the impugned interim order the order dated May 21, 2004 passed by the State urban Development Agency terminating the services on deputation of these employees have been stayed and the learned single Judge has further directed the authorities to allow the petitioners to continue in service in State Urban development Agency and District Urban development Agency.
( 5 ) AFTER hearing learned counsel for the parties in detail we are of the opinion that the impugned order cannot be sustained. Firstly by the said interim order final relief has been granted which cannot be done as
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.