Rakesh Tiwari, J. - (1.) Though on record there are three applications dated 10.10.1995, 28.2.1996 and 21 8.1996 filed by Sri V.K. Barman, Senior Counsel for the contesting respondent, for listing the stay vacating application alleged to have been filed by him on 3.5.1995 along with counter-affidavit, but no such stay vacating application is on the record along with counter-affidavit. The office has also reported vide its reports dated-19.7.1996 and 28.4.2003 that no stay vacating application along with counter-affidavit has been filed by the respondent. On 9.9.2003 I had asked Sri Samir Sharma, Counsel for the petitioner, to inform Sri Barman to be present when the case is taken up after lunch, but no one was present for the contesting respondent. Sri Samir Sharma states that he had informed Sri Barman in writing vide his letter dated 9.9.2003 that the case would be taken up after lunch. The said letter of Sri Samir Sharma dated 9.9.2003 is placed on the record.
(2.) Heard Sri Samir Sharma, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and the Standing Counsel.
(3.) The brief facts of the case arc that the UP. State Road Transport Corporation was constituted with effect from 1.6.1972 under Section 3 of the Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950 and it succeeded in toto the assets and liabilities of the erstwhile U.P. Government Roadways. Since the Corporation did not frame service regulations under Section 45 (2) (c) of the Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950 till 19.6.1981, the old Rules and regulations applicable to the employees of the Roadways Organization continued to apply.;