D.S.SINHA, LAKSHMI BIHARI, JJ. - (1.) HEARD Sri Rakesh Tiwari, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, at length and in detail. Sri V. N. Agrawal, learned standing counsel of the State of U. P., representing the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4, has also been heard.
(2.) THE order and judgment dated 18th July, 1988 passed by the U. P. Public Services Tribunal No. 1, Lucknow, the respondent No. 1, upholding the order dated 9th July. 1983, purporting to terminate the services of the petitioner as Collection Amin, is under challenge in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is not disputed that the petitioner was a temporary employee and his services were liable to be terminated under the provisions of the U. P. Temporary Government Servants (Termination of Service) Rules, 1975.
(3.) BEFORE the respondent No. 1, the order of termination was challenged by the petitioner as being punitive, and also as being discriminatory inasmuch as juniors to him were allowed to continue.;