ANIL KUMAR VERMA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was engaged on daily wage basis in 1989 and he had worked till 1992. Thereafter his services having been discontinued, a writ petition was moved alongwith several others, being Writ Petition No. 36846 of 1992 which is still pending. In the said order It was pointed out that if any appointment is mode by the respondent No. 2 the petitioner shall be given preference for appointment unless there are specific charges against any of the petitioner. By reason of the said order the petitioner was given fresh appointment in 1995 and it is alleged that he had continued till 10 7-1997. But subsecuently his payment of wages has been stopped,

(2.) By means of this writ petition the petitioner claims that he may be permitted to continue till regularly selected candidate in Class III post joins and that his work may not be interfered with and that his case may be considered for regularisation.

(3.) Sri Madan Mohan Lal Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in several decisions cited by him the petitioner is eligible and entitled to continue in service and for absorption.