NIYAZ AHMAD BHAT Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) EVEN if the facts as pleaded by the Union of India in the counter affidavit are taken at its face value, even then, something is required to be said in favour of the appellant.

(2.) NO doubt the writ petition preferred by the appellants stand dismissed, but it appears that some facts were not properly projected before the learned Single Judge.

(3.) THE undisputed facts are that appellant No. 1 namely Niyaz Ahmad Bhat came to be appointed as lower Division Clerk (LDC).Order to this effect was initially issued on 10 -08 -1990. The tenure fixed in the order came to an end on 04 -02 -1991. Thereafter petitioner/appellant No. 1 was reappointed for a further period of six months. This tenure was to expire on 05 -08 -1991. Even though the tenure came to be end. it is the case of the appellant No. 1 that he continued to perform the duties of the post of lower Division Clerk (LDC).