BIKAU YADAV Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents. The petitioner claims that he was appointed as 'Mali' in Veer Bahadur Singh Sports College, Gorakhpur with effect from 12.10.1989. Although the copy of the appointment letter has not been filed but it appears from the pleadings that his appointment was purely temporary in nature. He further alleges that all the employees of the college were told by the Principal orally that the college shall be closed for ever with effect from 15.5.1992 and thus they need not come to perform their duties. Certain employees along with the petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 20301 of 1992 (Km. Anshu Kapoor & others v. State of U.P. & others) in which a counter-affidavit was filed on behalf of respondent No. 2. In paragraph 13 of the counter-affidavit it was stated as under:

(2.) The writ petition was dismissed on 10.1.1995. An application dated 9.2.1995 was filed for recall of the order which was also dismissed on 10.3.1995 by passing the following order:

(3.) From the aforesaid, it is clear that earlier the writ petition was dismissed on merits and while rejecting the recall application, liberty was given to the petitioners to approach the concerned authority. It has further been pleaded in paragraph 12 of the writ petition that after disposal of writ petition No. 20301 of 1992, the petitioner approached the respondents several times for continuance of his job and gave several representations but no decision was taken and he was not allowed to work.