KRISHAN KUMAR SHARMA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant's challenge to the order dated August 1, 1975 by which he was reverted to his parent Department, having been negatived by the learned Single Judge, he has come up in this Letter Patent Appeal.

(2.) The appellant was recruited as, a Constable on December 2, 1960. On July 18, 1973, the appellant was appointed as a Prosecuting Sub Inspector on purely ad hoc basis for a period of six months. The period of ad hoc appointment was extended. The prosecution agency in the State was separated from the Police Department. Persons who were working as Prosecuting Sub Inspectors including the appellant were appointed as Assistant District Attorneys Grade II with effect from April 1, 1974. Vide order dated December 9, 1974, the period of ad hoc appointment of the appellant was extended for another six months. Some time later, a special report regarding his performance was called for. After the receipt of the report, the tenure of his ad hoc appointment was not extended beyond March 31, 1975. He was ordered to be reverted to his parent Department.

(3.) The sole contention raised before the learned Single Judge was that the reversion was punitive as it had been ordered on the ground that the record of service was not good. It was rejected. It was found that the appellant was working on a purely ad hoc basis and in view of the decision of their Lordships of the Supreme Court in State of Uttar Pradesh v/s. Kushal Kishore Shukla, 1991(1) S.L.R. 606, his claim could not be sustained. Hence this appeal.