TARUN AGARWALA
Surendra Kumar Hargovind Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
( 1 ) ON 29. 01. 1991, the State Government created Greater Noida Industrial Development authority. In furtherance of its objects, the Authority appointed a large number of persons on a contract basis on account of fact that the State Government did not create or sanctioned the post. Subsequently, Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority Service Regulation 1993- were framed which gave the Authority the power to appoint employees on a contract basis. Based on this, a large number of persons were appointed on a contract basis for 89 days. The petitioner was also appointed as an Assistant Manager on 23. 11. 1994 on a contract basis. The appointment letter stipulated that the appointment is only for 89 days on a fixed pay which would come to an end on the expiry of the period and that, the appointment- could be extended from time to time if there was a requirement of work and that the appointment was purely temporary in nature and that no claim of security or for the regularisation in the authority could be claimed by the employee.
( 2 ) IT transpires that after the creation of Greater Noida Authority, the State Government sanctioned 154 posts. On 11. 4. 2001,
Hindustan Shipyard Ltd. and Ors. v. Dr.P.Sambasiva Rao and Ors.
Daily Rated Casual Labour Employed under PandT Department v. Union of India and Ors.
State of Haryana and Anr. v. Ram Diya
State of U.P. and Ors. v. Dr.Deep Narain Tripathi and Ors.
Jawahar Lal Nehru Krishi Vishwavidyalaya Jabalpur, M.P. v. Bal Kishan Soni and Ors.
Ashwini Kumar and Ors. v. State of Bihar and Ors.
Narendra Chadda and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.
Director, Institute of Management Development U.P.v. Pushpa Srivastava
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.