SANTOSH KUMAR SHARMA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. Heard Sri V. Sahai, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

(2.) THE petitioner was engaged as a Chaukidar on daily wage basis at Nali Husainpur, District Ghaziabad vide order dated 7.7.1987 of Zila Yuva Kalyan Evam Pradeshik Vikas Dal Adhikari, Ghaziabad.. THE order of appointment shows that the petitioner's services were liable to be terminated at any point of time. By order dated 8.7.1988 the petitioner has been terminated with effect from 1.7.1988.

(3.) IN reply to paras 6 and 7 of the writ petition, the respondents in para 7 of the counter affidavit while denying the averments of the writ petition, have averred that the said termination was in accordance with the terms of letter of appointment that his services can be terminated without any prior notice. Moreover, if the petitioner had any grievance of violation of provision of a special statute, namely, U.P. INdustrial Disputes Act, 1947, the remedy provided in that statute ought to have been availed.