- (1.) THE appellants conduct who came to be appointed on adhoc basis, was not found satisfactory. His services were dispensed with. He is said to have been involved in a theft case. It was further stated that he was absent w.e.f. 12th Nov 90. It is in these circumstances, the services of the appellant were deemed to have come to an end. It is also stated that as the adhoc tenure for which the appellant came to be appointed was not extended, therefore, his services came to an end by afflux of time.
(2.) THIS action of the respondent -authorities was the subject matter of challenge in a writ petition. This stands dismissed. The appellant has preferred this appeal under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent Appeal. The facts in brief be again recapitulated:
(3.) THE father of the appellant was a class IV employee. He sought premature retirement. This led to the adjustment of the appellant in place of his father. The appellant came to be appointed on adhoc basis. This happened on 25th Oct 89. Thereafter, the tenure of the appellant was extended on 21st June 90. On 13thOct 90, the appellant was placed under suspension by Tehsildar, Banihal. This was because he was found to be absent w.e.f. 12th Nov1 90. It is further reported that he had broken the lock of the trunk of the Naib Tehsildar and had committed theft of cash amounting to Rs.200/ - It is also a fact that the appellant was tried in a case under Section 497 and 380 of the Penal Code. The appellant was ultimately acquitted. A judgment of acquittal was recorded on 5th April1 94. When the appellant came to be acquitted, he preferred representations seeking reinstatement. A judgment of acquittal was recorded on 5th April 94. When the appellant came to be acquitted, he preferred representations seeking reinstatement. As the work and conduct of the appellant during the period of his adhoc services, was not found to be satisfactory. His plea for reinstatement was not accepted. It is under these circumstances, he approached this court. It is not in dispute that the appellant was absent w.e.f. 12thNov 90. it is also a fact that the appellant was involved in a criminal case. In this criminal case, he was acquitted. Taking into consideration, the above factor, the writ petition was dismissed.;