MAGARSEN Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties. By means of this writ petition the petitioner has prayed that oral order dated 1.6.92 given by the respondent No. 3 by which petitioner was asked not to attend his duties, be declared illegal and void. Further prayer has been made that respondents be commanded to allow the petitioner to continue on his post and to pay regular pay scale to the petitioner at par to the regularly appointed Class IV employees.

(2.) PETITIONER claims to have been appointed as daily wager Peon on 13th July, 1988 and according to him he has been continuously working till 31.5.1992. It has been pleaded that as the work and conduct of the petitioner has been satisfactory and good, the petitioner has completed more than 240 days in every year, the action of the respondent in terminating the petitioner's services by oral order, is clearly illegal.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel who appears for the respondents on the strength of the facts so Stated in the counter -affidavit submits before this Court that -