RAM SAJIWAN MISRA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) R. H. Zaidi, J. Heard learned coun sel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel.

(2.) BY means of this petition, petitioner challenges the order of termination dated 6-11-1985.

(3.) IN the counter affidavit filed on be half of the respondents, the facts stated in the writ petition have not been controve rted. The fact and date of promotion, of the petitioner, as stated above, has been ad mitted in para 9 of the counter affidavit; but it has been stated that the work and conduct of the petitioner was not found satisfactory as such his services have been terminated.