DHARAMINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for quashing action or respondent No.2 (Advocate General, Haryana, Chandigarh) not allowing the petitioners to continue in service, whereas the juniors had been retained.

(2.) Petitioner No. 1 was appointed as a Class-IV employee on 10.5.1994. He continued in service up to 31.10.1994. He was again appointed on 24.11.1994 to remain in service up to 23.1.1995. He was again employed from 1.2.1995 to 30.4.1995, 4.5.1995 to 31.7.1995, 13.10.1995 to 9.1.1996 and for different periods, with intermittent breaks, up to 4.6.1996. He was not allowed to continue in service after 5.6.1996.

(3.) Petitioner No.2 also worked as a Class-IV employee in the office of the Advocate General, Haryana, from 4.10.1994 to 31.12.1994, 2.1.1995 to 31.3.1995, 3.4.1995 to 31.5.1995, 5.6.1995 to 1.9.1995, 13.10.1995 to 9.1.1996 and similarly onwards, with breaks in service, up to 4.6.1996.