MUKUL KUMAR THAKUR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) THE petitioner in this writ application has confined his prayer to his claim for payment of salary for the period which he had worked under the respondents.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner would argue that a categorical stand taken by the petitioner that he had worked from February, 1999 to September, 1999 continuously, has not been specifically denied by the respondents. The mere fact that the records are not available in the office of the respondents, cannot led to the conclusion that the petitioner did not work for the period. As per the counter affidavit, the respondents have not specifically denied or disputed the petitioner's claim that he has worked from February, 1999 to September, 1999.