STATE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AGENCY Vs. DINESH CHANDRA SAXENA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) This special appeal has been filed against the impugned interim order of the learned single Judge dated July 16, 2004 in writ petition No. 26317 of 2004.

(3.) It appears that the respondents were employees of the U.P. State Handloom Corporation and they had been sent on deputation to the State Urban Development Agency. They were retrenched from their parent department, that is U.P. State Handloom Corporation. As a consequence, their services were also terminated in the State Urban Development Agency where they had been sent on deputation.