ARVIND MISHRA Vs. ZILA NIBANDHAK AZAMGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A classic instance of an interim order passed by this Court being a windfall is provided here.

(2.) The petitioner Arvind Mishra invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court on the plea that he had been given appointment for a period of 90 days, but his services had been wrongfully terminated before the expiry of this period.

(3.) When the matter came up for preliminary hearing on July 11, 1991, being B.M. Lal, J. an interim order was passed by virtue of which the respondents were restrained from interfering with the working of the petitioner as clerk. A direction was also issued that he be paid his remuneration regularly. If, is by virtue of this order that the petitioner has continued in service ever since, that is, for over three and half years.