V RAMAN Vs. LT GOVERNOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant in this writ appeal calls in question the judgment and order dated January 29, 2013 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing his writ petition.

(2.) The learned Single Judge after recording the factual aspects observed as follows:

(3.) Mr. Singh, learned Advocate representing the appellant, contended thahince the appellant's service has been terminated by a stigmatic order, an enquiry ought to have preceded the same notwithstanding the fact that he was an ad hoc appointee. According to him, the Labour Court and the learned Single Judge failed to consider this aspect and erred in the exercise of their jurisdiction in refusing to accept the claim of the appellant. It was also contended by him that the Labour Court looked into documents which were not brought on record in a legal manner. Orders holding the termination illegal and reinstatement of the appellant in service with consequential benefits were, accordingly, prayed for by him.