GOPAL RAM Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. S.S. Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. P.S. Bisht, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. None appears for respondent No. 4, though he is represented by Mr. M.C. Kandpal, Senior Advocate in the writ petition.

(2.) The brief facts of the case, which are being agitated by the petitioner in the present writ petition, are that he alleges that he is a Hindi Stenographer certificate holder from I.T.I. Almora, a certificate was issued in his favour to the said effect on 06.11.1987. Since at the relevant time, when he was engaged in private work, after getting knowledge about the availability of vacancy of Stenographer, Hindi on the creation of Tehsil Kapkot, District Bageshwar, District Administration decided to fill the post by holding oral / temporary test. He sought his appointment against the vacant post of Stenographer in the scale of Rs.4,000-6,000/-, for which he submitted an application.

(3.) It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that his claim for appointment was considered by the respondents and they passed the order dated 22nd June, 1998, whereby, the petitioner was granted an appointment exclusively on temporary basis with a rider that the appointment was to continue till regularly selected candidate joins into the services. There was also a rider attach to it, that no claim to the contrary of any nature whatsoever would be tenable at the behest of the petitioner claiming a relief for regularization of his services. Meaning thereby, at the time when the petitioner accepted appointment based on the conditions of the letter of appointment on 22nd June, 1998, he was equally bound by the terms and conditions of the said letter of appointment and later on, he could not have resiled from the same, as his action would be barred by estoppel and acquiescence.