- (1.)Petitioner, who is a Supervisor Qanoongo in the service of Government of U.P. was promoted for a fixed period of 42 days to the post of Naib Tahsildar by District Magistrate, Ballia vide his order dated 4-8-1992. After the tenure of 42 days came to an end, Petitioner has again been promoted by order dated 22-10-1992 for the period upto 31-10-92. This writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner for quashing the aforesaid order dated 22-10-92 and for writ of mandamus commanding the Respondents not to revert him to his original post of Supervisor Qanoongo after 31-10-92.
(2.)learned Counsel for the Petitioner has made two submissions, namely (1) Petitioner is fully qualified and being one of the seniormost Supervisor Qanoongos is entitled to be promoted to the post of Naib Tahsildar; and (2) In any case till the regular selection is made, Petitioner is entitled to continue to work as Naib Tahsildar. On the basis of above submissions it has been contended by the learned Counsel that it is not open to the Respondents to revert the Petitioner after the expiry of his term. It is not possible to agree with the learned Counsel.
(3.)Supreme Court in the case of Director v. Smt. P. Srivastava, 1992 4 JT 489 has laid down that if a person is appointed for a fixed period his tenure comes to an end automatically on the expiry of the term and he has no right to continue thereafter, mentioned hereinbefore, both the orders promoting the Petitioner to the post of Naib Tahsildar being for fixed periods, he is not entitled to continue after the expiry of the term.