STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Vs. POORAN SINGH BHANDARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) The petitioner being aggrieved, filed the writ petition which was allowed by the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 2nd August, 2004 on the ground that the petitioner was a temporary employee under the U.P. Temporary Government Servants (Termination of Service) Rules, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) and was required to be given a notice under Rule 3 of the said Rules which had not been given and consequently, the order of termination was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. The learned Single Judge further found that the petitioner was a retrenched employee from the District Census Office and was liable to be given an appointment as per the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Government of Tamilnadu and another v. G. Mohammad Ammenudeen and others, 1999 83 FLR 572 (SC). The respondents, being aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Single Judge has filed the present special appeal.

(3.) Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties at some length, the Court finds that the order of the learned Single Judge holding that the writ petitioner was a temporary employee, as defined under Rule 3 of the Rules of 1975, is not correct. In this regard, the petitioner's appointment letter dated 21st June, 1991 needs to be perused, which indicates that the petitioner was appointed on a temporary basis, on account of the suspension of another employee. The appointment letter also indicated that the services of the writ petitioner would come to an end at any point of time without even giving a notice. The order of termination dated 30th April, 1994 clearly indicates that the suspended employee against whose post the petitioner was appointed, had joined the services and, therefore, the services of the petitioner was no longer required. "Temporary service" under the Rules of 1975 has been defined as officiating or substantive service on a temporary post or officiating service on a permanent post under the Government but there are certain exceptions where such appointments would not be treated as a temporary service as contemplated under Rule 4. For facility, Rule 4 of the service is extracted hereunder: