DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER Vs. ATULKUMAR VIKRAMBHAI PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the present appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, the appellants - original respondents have challenged the order dtd. 6/4/2022 passed by learned Single Judge in the captioned writ petition by which the learned Single Judge partly allowed the writ petition of the respondent herein and quashed the termination order dtd. 1/1/2015 passed by the appellants and directed the appellants herein to reinstate the respondent on his original post with continuity of service with similar service conditions within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of the said order.

(2.) The short facts arise from the record are as under :-

(3.) Mr. H.S. Munshaw, learned advocate appearing for the appellant would submit that learned Single Judge while allowing the writ petition ought not to have granted continuity of service since the respondent was appointed on fixed pay for a period of five years. However, upon a query being put to him with regard to the decisions relied upon by learned Single Judge and the facts on hand, he was unable to show any reason to treat the respondent No.1 differently.