SUSHIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) G. P. Mathur, J. This special appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 21-2-2000 of a learned Single Judge by which the writ petition filed by the appellant challenging the order dated 26-7-1990 ter minating his services was dismissed.

(2.) WE have heard learned counsel for the appellant and have perused the record. The appellant was appointed as Gram Panchayat Adhikari on 8-7-1983 and his services were terminated by the order dated 26-7-1990. In the appointment order, it was mentioned that the appoint ment of the appellant was purely tem porary and it can be terminated at any time without any prior notice. The services of the appellant have been terminated in ac cordance with U. P. Temporary Govern ment Servants (Termination of Service) Rules, 1975. There was a clear term in the appointment order that his service was temporary and could be terminated at any time without any notice. Being a tem porary employee, the appellant had ac quired no right to the post. The appointing authority exercised his power con templated under Rules 1975 and ter minated the service of the appellant. WE do not find any error or illegality in the order by which the services of the appel lant have been terminated.

(3.) HAVING given our careful con sideration to the submission made by learned counsel for the appellant we do not find any illegality in the impugned order of the learned Single Judge which may warrant interference in appeal.