STATE OF U.P Vs. RAM GOVIND RAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this appeal, a challenge is made to the judgment dtd. 6/12/2017 by which the writ petition preferred by the petitioner/ non-appellant was allowed.

(2.) The case has a chequered history but to summarize it, suffice would be in regard to the initial appointment of the non-appellant on short term vacancy. The ad-hoc appointment was continued from time to time and for that last extension was from 8/8/1985 till 30/6/1986. The petitioner/ non-appellant was to be discontinued from service thus he preferred a writ petition.

(3.) An interim order was passed in the said writ petition to continue the petitioner/ non-appellant till selected candidates are made available. The writ petition aforesaid was finally dismissed in the year 2001. The petitioner/ non-appellant was however continued in the service and in between an order for his regularisation was also issued. The petitioner/ non-appellant even then continued till he attained the age of superannuation in the year 2018. In between when he was not paid salary, maintained the writ petition in hand to seek a direction for payment of salary from the month of November, 2013 till date.