STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. RAM PRATAP.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This special appeal is directed against the order dated 9.10.1991 by which the learned Single Judge disposed of as many as 141 writ petitions filed before him. The learned Single Judge in the ultimate para ..of his order had given the following directions :

(2.) These writ petitions are, therefore, disposed of in the following manner :

(3.) So far as the direction No. 2 extracted above in the order of the learned Single Judge is concerned, it will be seen from a bare reading that the learned Single Judge has directed that the petitioners before him should be paid salary for the entire period for which their appointments have subsisted, and they should also get one month's salary. In our opinion, one who has actually worked and whose appointment has been in subsistence, is entitled for the salary for the period he worked. Even in the case of temporary employees, their services can be terminated only after one month's notice and the learned Single Judge in the case of the petitioners before him directed that they will also be entitled to get one month's salary. We are of the opinion that the order of the learned Single Judge is just and equitable and does not call for any interference.