(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the appellants -State and learned counsel for the opposite party.
(2.) THE present appeal has been preferred against the order dated 24.4.1997 passed in CWJC. No. 2813 of 1996 by which the learned writ court has quashed the order of reversion of the opposite party to the post of a Computer (which should perhaps be read as a Computator) from that of an Assistant.
(3.) THIS court taking into consideration the fact that from the initial date of appointment the work of a Clerk was being taken from the opposite party and subsequently in view of the decision of the State authorities, as the cadre was merged, he was confirmed on the post of a Clerk and thereafter was granted promotion, today after 25 years on technicality the State cannot be allowed to turn back and revert the writ petitioner back to the initial post on which he was appointed and further direct for a recovery. It is a fact not disputed that from his date of appointment till date writ petitioner was discharging the duty of a Clerk. Today, he cannot be made to suffer due to lapses if any, on the part of the State.