Suneel Kumar Vs. Regional Assistant Director of Education (Basic) and anr.

Suneel Kumar vs Regional Assistant Director of Education (Basic) and anr.

Disposition Petition dismissed Court Allahabad Decided Apr 29, 2002

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/484130

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/484130
Court: Allahabad High Court
Judge: Anjani Kumar, J.
Decided On: Apr 29, 2002
Case Number: C.M.W.P. No. 22875 of 1988
Subject: Service
Disposition: Petition dismissed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service - temporary appointment - Rules 4 and 5 of U.P. Temporary Government Servants (Termination of Services) Rules, 1975 - petitioner appointed as junior clerk - appointment purely temporary and could be terminated without notice - services terminated by impugned Order in exercise of power under Rules by giving o...

Key legal issue: Service
Outcome / disposition: Petition dismissed
Acts & sections: Uttar Pradesh Temporary Government Servants (Termination of Services) Rule, 1975 - Rules 4 and 5

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Suneel Kumar

Advocate Anil Srivastava, Adv.

Respondent

Regional Assistant Director of Education (Basic) and anr.

Advocate K.S. Shukla, S.C.

Legal References

Acts: Uttar Pradesh Temporary Government Servants (Termination of Services) Rule, 1975 - Rules 4 and 5
Reported In: 2002(4)AWC2844; (2002)3UPLBEC2742

Excerpt

service - temporary appointment - rules 4 and 5 of u.p. temporary government servants (termination of services) rules, 1975 - petitioner appointed as junior clerk - appointment purely temporary and could be terminated without notice - services terminated by impugned order in exercise of power under rules by giving one month notice - high court while entertaining writ petition granted interim order - held, petitioner failed to show any defect in termination order which is unassailable. - - the order of appointment (annexure-1 to the writ petition) clearly demonstrates that the appointment is purely temporary and can be terminated at any time even without prior notice.anjani kumar, j.1. petitioner who was appointed vide order dated 22.4.1987 passed by regional assistant director of education, basic, moradabad on the post of junior clerk. the order of appointment (annexure-1 to the writ petition) clearly demonstrates that the appointment is purely temporary and can be terminated at any time even without prior notice. petitioner was working when his services were terminated by impugned order dated 5.9.1988 (annexure-6 to the writ petition) wherein the petitioner's services terminated in exercise of powers under rule known as u. p. government servants (termination of services) rules, 1975 by giving a month's notice that from the date of issuance of this notice, his services will stand terminated. it is this notice which has been challenged by the petitioner on the ground that the order of termination does not give any reason. this court while entertaining this writ petition granted an interim order which interim order is still continuing.2. learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner who has been working since 1988 by virtue of the aforesaid interim order and now cannot be allowed to be thrown on the roads, as in between he has become overage. so far as the order of termination is concerned, in view of this letter of appointment, the order dated 5.9.1988 is unassailable and nor could any defect be pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner.3. in this view of the matter, this writ petition deserves to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed, interim order stands vacated.

Full Judgment

Anjani Kumar, J.

1. Petitioner who was appointed vide order dated 22.4.1987 passed by Regional Assistant Director of Education, Basic, Moradabad on the post of Junior Clerk. The order of appointment (Annexure-1 to the writ petition) clearly demonstrates that the appointment is purely temporary and can be terminated at any time even without prior notice. Petitioner was working when his services were terminated by impugned order dated 5.9.1988 (Annexure-6 to the writ petition) wherein the petitioner's services terminated in exercise of powers under rule known as U. P. Government Servants (Termination of Services) Rules, 1975 by giving a month's notice that from the date of issuance of this notice, his services will stand terminated. It is this notice which has been challenged by the petitioner on the ground that the order of termination does not give any reason. This Court while entertaining this writ petition granted an interim order which interim order is still continuing.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner who has been working since 1988 by virtue of the aforesaid interim order and now cannot be allowed to be thrown on the roads, as in between he has become overage. So far as the order of termination is concerned, in view of this letter of appointment, the order dated 5.9.1988 is unassailable and nor could any defect be pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. In this view of the matter, this writ petition deserves to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed, Interim order stands vacated.

Same Court & Year Allahabad · 2002 Same Parties Suneel Kumar vs Regional Assistant Director of Education (Bas... Same Subject Service Same Judge Anjani Kumar, J. Acts & Sections Uttar Pradesh Temporary Government Servants (Termination of S...

Service