Rakesh Tiwari - (1.) -Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
(2.) THE petitioner was appointed on 6.6.1989 as Road Roller Driver against permanent vacancy by the Adhyaksha, Zila Parishad. THE post of Road Roller Driver is mentioned at serial No. 32 of Schedule A to the U. P. Zila Parishad Service Rules, 1970. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of his termination dated 2nd September, 1992. It is alleged that the petitioner had put more than three years service as Road Roller Driver and the termination of his service without any show cause notice is in violation of the principles of natural justice as well as the provisions of G.O. dated 30.3.1979. The case of the petitioner is that a new District, Kanpur Dehat, was carved out and the petitioner was appointed on temporary basis. It is contended that he was paid salary upto 30.10.1991 regularly except increment and house allowance, but all of a sudden, the respondents stopped paying salary to him with effect from 1.11.1991. The petitioner sent a reminder to respondent No. 2 on 31.8.1992, for payment of his salary, but on 3.9.1992, he was served with the impugned order of termination. It is averred in paragraph 13 of the writ petition that about 19 persons junior to the petitioner are still working and as such, his termination order is illegal and arbitrary and is in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. It is submitted that the termination order has been passed by way of punishment under U. P. Temporary Government Termination of Service Rules, 1975 and that the impugned order of termination is without jurisdiction inasmuch as Rajendra Singh Chauhan is not the Adhyaksha, who has passed the impugned order, but Sri R. N. Tripathi is duly elected Adhyaksha.
(3.) IN the counter-affidavit, it has been stated that the petitioner was not appointed against any vacancy under Rule 51 (1) of the U. P. Zila Parishad Service Rules, 1970. His appointment was temporary/ad hoc and as such, his services can be terminated at any time. Besides this, one Surendra Kumar was a permanent Road Roller Driver on the sanctioned post of Road Roller Driver, which has been sanctioned on 16.2.1990 under Rule 4 (3) of the U. P. Zila Parishad Service Rules, 1970. There was only one vacancy of Road Roller Driver on which Surendra Kumar was working. The petitioner was not appointed on the sanctioned post and being temporary, has no right to the post. It is further stated that the second post of Road Roller Driver was never created, but the petitioner was illegally appointed as his father was the then Office Superintendent exerted under influence. It has also been averred in paragraph 4 of the counter-affidavit that the petitioner does not have any certificate for driving heavy vehicle. It has been submitted by the standing counsel that the appointment of the petitioner was illegal and temporary, hence there is no illegality in the order of termination, and the same has not been passed by way of punishment under U. P. Temporary Government Termination of Service Rules, 1975.;