MANAGING COMMITTEE Vs. RAM PHOOL MEENA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE on similar set of facts, the common judgment passed by learned Single Judge is under challenge, both the appeals have been heard together and are being decided by this common order.

(2.) AS has come on record, the respondent -employee was appointed on temporary basis as a Gardner by the appellant Management. A decision was taken by the Managing Committee on 21.5.1994 to abolish three adhoc posts including, Steno Typist, Assistant and that of Gardner. Consequently, a notice was issued to all the three employees including the respondent -employee as well who was working on the post of Gardner on 1.7.1994 in regard to termination of their services w.e.f. 31st July, 1994.

(3.) DURING pendency of the writ petition filed by the appellant Management, as referred above, the respondent -employee filed a separate Writ Petition No. 2592/95 challenging the order dated 24.4.1995. The learned Single Judge stayed the operation of order dated 24.4.1995 vide order dated 23.6.1995 in Writ Petition No. 2592/1995. It may also be noted here that the learned Single Judge while vacating the interim order passed in Writ Petition No. 2592/95 also confirmed the interim order passed by the Court earlier on 3.4.1995 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 277/95 on 20.11.1995. The second stay application filed by the respondent -employee in the subsequent writ petition also came to be dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 15.12.1995. Both the writ petitions, referred above, one filed by the appellant Management and the other filed by the respondent -employee, came to be decided by the learned Single Judge by a common order dated 22nd January, 1997. While dismissing the writ petition filed by the Management, the writ petition filed by the respondent -employee was allowed, the order passed by the Tribunal was affirmed and the order dated 24.4.1995 was also was set aside.