Rajiv Sharma, J. - (1.) HEARD Mr. Alok Kumar Sharma, learned Counsel for the applicant.
(2.) THE petitioner was appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher vide order dated 30.6.1986, whereby it was specifically provided that the services of the petitioner can be terminated at any time. Accordingly, services of the petitioner were terminated and this Court, vide judgment and order dated 17.3.2010, dismissed inter alia on the ground that in view of the law down in the case of The Secretary, State of Karnataka and Others. Verses Smt. Uma Devi And Others. : 2006 (4) SCC 1, the petitioner has no legal right for appointment on the post in question. Thereafter, the instant application has been preferred on the ground that the petitioner was appointed on the post in question in Shishu Shala & Balwari Kendra Malkegaon, Raibareli in the pay scale of Rs. 185 -3 -215, vide appointment letter dated 30.6.1986 issued by the opposite party No. 3. Therefore, the petitioner's appointment was made against the clear vacancy, as the letter of appointment shows that it is an ad hoc appointment and in similarly situated persons, namely, Km. Usha Devi Singh has already been regularized in the department.
(3.) A query was put to the learned counsel for the petitioner that as to whether the appointment, on the post in question, though ad hoc, was in accordance with rules or not, to which learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the appointment is not an ad hoc appointment. He fails to point out that while appointing her, the recruitment rules are followed and as such, the appointment is dehors rules. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the case Vijai Singh Verses The Kamla Nehru Institute of Science and Technology, Sultanpur And Others, 2007 (25) LCD 1591 and Muneshwar Dayal Verses Zila Karyakram Adhikari, District Bijnor And Others : (1998) 2 UPLBEC 1023 relied upon by the petitioner's Counsel are not applicable in the instant case.;