SUSHI LAL SRLVASTAVA Vs. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER PWD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) D. K. Seth, J. By the order dated 21-2-1990 (Annexure-2), the petitioner was asked to carry on the work of Junior Engineer (Technical) in a vacant post for a period of two months or till joining of a regular Junior Engineer on ad hoc basis. By order dated 17-7-1991 (Annexure-11), the petitioner was asked to handover cna'-ge to regular Junior Engineer, who had joined the post. The petitioner has challenged this order by means of this writ petition.

(2.) MR. Madan Lal Srivastava holding the brief of MR.Janardan Sahai,learned Counsel for the petitioner, relied on a Government Order dated 19th Septem ber, 1981 (Annexure-13) and contended that in view of the said Government Order, the petitioner cannot be removed because the said G. O. specifically lays down that those who have been temporari ly promoted, should not be removed.

(3.) MR. Parihar, learned Standing Counsel, contends that the petitioner has not acquired any right by virtue of the said Government Order, which is only an ad ministrative instruction without any statutory or binding force. On the basis of administrative instruction, the petitioner cannot have any right. Therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable.