Umeshwar Pandey, J. - (1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri Vivek Saran, Additional Standing Counsel for Union of India.
(2.) Petitioner has challenged the judgment and order dated 9.10.2001 whereby the petitioner's representation was rejected. The facts giving rise to the application were that the petitioner was earlier working as Foreman in Military Farm, Meerut and subsequently on abolition of the post of Foreman, he had been reverted to the post of Tractor Driver. This order was challenged before the Tribunal on the ground that there is no justification for abolition of the post of Foreman as the requirement in the Military Farm was there and that he was working on the post of Tractor Driver.
(3.) The Tribunal considering the facts and circumstances as brought on record, has held that the post which was held by the petitioner as Foreman in the Military Farm, had been abolished and he had no right to make the claim for his retention on that post. Accordingly, the original application has been dismissed.;