NAGAR PALICA HASANPUR Vs. ABHILASH KUMAR SAXENA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition arises out of an order dated December 29, 1981 passed by the U. P. Public Service Tribunal, Lucknow. Respondent No. 1, Abhilash Kumar Saxena, was appointed as a clerk in the Nagar Palika, Hasanpur, District Moradabad. His services were terminated by the President of the Board vide an order dated September 12/18, 1975. Against this order a representation was made to the President of the Board. In the meantime the said order of termination was withdrawn. The respondent No. 1 was allowed to work in his post and the period of probation was extended for three months more.

(2.) ON the representation of the respondent No. 1, the President was pleased to pass an order confirming him with effect from January 1, 1976. In the meantime a new President came into office who by an order dated May 18, 1978 had cancelled the order of confirmation dated January 1, 1976. In addition to this he passed another order dated November 10, 1976 terminating the services of respondent No. 1. An appeal was preferred against the said order which was rejected by the Commissioner of the Division. Feeling aggrieved against the order of the Commissioner, he preferred a Claim Petition before the U. P. Public Services Tribunal, Lucknow, praying that a declaration be issued that the order of de-confirmation dated May 18, 1976 and the order of termination dated November 10, 1976 are illegal and void. It was further prayed that he be declared to be a confirmed and permanent employee of the Board and to have continued on his post as before and was also entitled to all its benefits and continuity of service in the Board.

(3.) THE said Claim Petition was contested by the Board on the ground that the services of respondent No. 1 were initially terminated but he was allowed to continue to work and his probationary period was extended only for three months more. The order of confirmation which was passed on January 1, 1976 was based on wrong facts and as such the President by an order dated May 18, 1976 cancelled the said order and de-confirmed the claimant. It was further stated that the order of de-confirmation was passed on the basis of Rule 9 of the U. P. Municipal Servants Appeals Rules, 1967, hereinafter referred to as the Rules. The claim Petition was, however, allowed on December 29, 1981. Feeling aggrieved, the Nagar Palika has preferred the present writ petition.