ARBIND KUMAR Vs. BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE order assailed is dated 10th May, 1995 on C.W.J.C. No. 11604 of 1993 (Arbind Kumar V/s.The State of Bihar and Ors.). The contention of the petitioner that his appointment as an unskilled Khaiasi had been illegally cancelled was not upheld in the writ petition. Thus, the present Letters Patent Appeal. The petitioner accepts that he had been appointed to do the work of typist on payment of Rs. 17/ - per day.The petitioner claims that he is an unskilled Khalasi and subsequently appointed as such but on daily rate basis.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner had been noticed by the learned judge that the petitioner was engaged initially on 3.8.1988. It is contended by the counsel for the appellant that this is an error and it is submitted that the petitioner was otherwise engaged on 28.3.1988. It is accepted that he was dis -engaged, as mentioned in the impugned order itself, on 29.1.1989. On this, the petitioner seeks regulan 'sation of services.

(3.) FURTHER the petitioner contends that subsequent to the engagement in 1988 -89 he had also been called to work as is witnessed by Office Order dated 29.1.1992 when he was appointed as an unskilled Khalasi. The petitioner further mentions that in view of what has been placed as Annexure 3 to the petition he had been appointed by an Office Order dated 24.2.1992 but with effect from 29.1.1992. This office order records that the petitioner has been appointed provisionally. But, this is not a letter of appointment, in fact, in the next month it cancels the appointment of the petitioner.