DEENA NATH SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr.S.C.Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel.

(2.) THROUGH the instant writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated 21st of March, 2007, passed by the State Government, whereby the petitioner's claim for absorption as Class -III employee has been rejected.

(3.) THE facts in brief as set out by the petitioner are that initially he was appointed on 1.11.1992 as junior clerk/typist and also to discharge the duty of work supervisor. But in the month of December, 1998 his services were terminated alongwith others. Being aggrieved with the order of termination the petitioner and four others preferred the writ petition being writ petition No.728 (SS) of 1999 before this court. This court by means of order dated 20.12.1999 provided the benefit of order passed in writ petition No.8148 of 1990 in favour of the petitioners. This court made the following observation: -