VED PRAKASH KARNWAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who had been 5 Registration Clerk, was appointed/promoted on officiating basis (as a stop gap arrangement) as a sub-registrar vide order dated 8-6-1996 contained in Annexure 5 to the writ petition. The terms of the appointment, promotion letter make it clear that the said promotion was only for a period of six months or till the regular selection is made, as per the provisions of U. P. Sub-registrar Service Rules, 1983 (hereinafter called as 1983 Rules) whichever is earlier. Another relevant condition of the promotion letter is that if the work the petitioner for a period of six months is found satisfactory, stamp duty and registration fee received is found 25 per cent over and above the last years' receipt, promotion may be renewed for a further period of six months. The petitioner has been reverted back to his original post of Registration Clerk vide order dated 6-12-1996 contained in Annexure 8 to the writ petition. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, petitioner preferred this writ petition.

(2.) Heard Shri Ashok Khare, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Pratap Gupta, Additional Chief Standing Counsel on behalf of the respondents.

(3.) In State of Punjab v. Surinder Singh, AIR 1992 SC 1593 the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that there is no reason as to why the services of an employee be not governed by the terms and conditions of the appointment letter.