AMRIT LAL CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE have heard Shri Vinay Malaviya, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Learned Standing Counsel appears for the respondents.

(2.) THE petitioner is serving as Forest Range Officer, Tindwari, Bundelkhand Range, Banda. He is going to attain the age of superannuation on 29.2.2012.

(3.) IT is submitted by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, that on the letter of the Deputy Secretary, Government of U.P. written to the Chief Conservator of Forest, U.P on 15.11.2011, a report was called by the Chief Conservator of Forest (Administration) U.P. Lucknow from the Chief Conservator of Forest, Bundelkhand Zone, Jhansi. In response to this letter dated 15.11.2011, the Chief Conservator of Forest, Jhansi has reported in his letter dated 15.12.2011 that the petitioner is honest, and hardworking officer; he had taken special interest in forestation and execution of Bundelkhand Special Package; during the period of his service, his work was appreciated and he has made a recommendation for extension of petitioner's services for two years beyond February, 2012. Shri Vinay Malaviya, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has relied upon a Government Order dated 22.7.1987, issued by the then Chief Secretary, Government of UP, reiterating the previous Government Orders that the request for extension in service should not be considered after the government servant has retired. If on any technical or scientific post, a suitable substitute is not available, inspite of the best efforts, and that in public interest it has become absolutely necessary to grant extension, the department may consider with the approval of the personnel department to engage the government servant on contract for extended period.