ROSHAN LAL Vs. PUNJAB STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard on merits. Learned counsel cites Sushil Kumar Yadunath Jha Vs. Union of India and another, A.I.R. 1986 Supreme Court 1635 in support of his contention that benefit of past service should be allowed. However, I do not find any merit in this contention. The ratio of the aforesaid decision cannot be applied to the facts of the case in hand. In that case Sushit Kumar worked from 1965 to 1968. Suddenly his services were terminated on March 8, 1968 and few days thereafter he made a representation, on which fresh appointment was given on June 24, 1968 and thus it was held that it was not a case of break in service and benefit of previous service was allowed. In the present case the appellant was appointed on April 7,1966 and his services were terminated on Dec. 15,1967. It was after two years that on Dec. 16, 1969 he was re-appointed. Apart from these facts there is nothing on the record to suggest that his reappointment was in continuation of his previous service. Thus he could not get benefit in the matter of service and seniority etc. This petition is dismissed for recalling the order of dismissing of appeal. Petition dismissed.