BRIJ MOHAN Vs. CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the instant writ petition, the petitioner has questioned the validity of the judgment and order dated 26.8.1998 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, in Original Application No. 2128 of 1997, Brij Mohan v. Union of India, and has prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the termination order dated 26.4.1991 and verbal order dated 7.10.1992 passed by Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal. Allahabad Bench, Allahabad.

(2.) The facts of the case, in brief, are that the petitioner was selected by the Vice-Chairman of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad, on the post of driver on temporary basis in the pay scale of Rs. 950-1,500 for a period of three months. Subsequently, by means of letter dated 13.3.1990, the temporary appointment of the petitioner was extended till further orders. Subsequently, the services of the petitioner were dispensed with on 26.4.1991 by the Registrar exercising and invoking the powers vested in him under Sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 of the Central Civil Services (Temporary) Service Rules. 1965. Against the aforementioned order of termination, the petitioner claims to have submitted a detailed representation dated 21.5.1991. Further contention of the petitioner is that considering his application dated 21.5.1991, fresh appointment was given to him on 1.11.1991 mentioning therein that the petitioner was being appointed on ad hoc basis for a period of three months. It was also categorically mentioned therein that the appointment of the petitioner was absolutely fresh appointment for a period of three months without any lien on his pervious employment, and that this appointment would automatically come to an end on the expiry of the period of three months. Pursuant to the aforementioned fresh appointment on ad hoc basis, the petitioner continued to function up to 6.10.1992, and thereafter with effect from 7.10.1992, no work was assigned to the petitioner. The petitioner against this order of termination alleges to have filed various representations, the last one being representation dated 14.7.1993, and as no orders have been passed thereon, the petitioner approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad, through Original Application No. 1318 of 1993. During the pendency of the original application at Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad, an application was moved to the Chairman, Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, for transfer of the original application to the Principal Bench. The Principal Bench transferred the original application of the petitioner, and thereafter dismissed the claim preferred on his behalf. After dismissal of the aforesaid claim, the present writ petition has been filed, as mentioned above.

(3.) We have heard Sri A. S. Diwekar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Amit Asthelkar for the contesting respondents.