ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for he petitioner and Sri S.K. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. This petition has been filed for a direction upon the respondents to allow the petitioner to rejoin his duties and to pay him salary regularly. It has also been prayed that the entire emoluments payable from 1987 along with other benefits be paid to the petitioner.
(2.) A perusal of the record goes to show that petitioner appeared in selection proceedings undertaken by the respondent corporation for appointment to the post of conductor. He was placed in the waiting list. A communication was issued on 22.5.1987, requiring the petitioner to contact the office of the Corporation so that he could be offered an opportunity to serve the Corporation. Annexure- 3 to the writ petition is a certificate issued by the Assistant Regional Manager dated 1.6.1987 that petitioner has undertaken required steps and that since he has not been sent for training, as such, he be attached with some conductor for 7 days for the purposes of training. A further certificate has been brought on record as Annexure-4, according to which petitioner was to undertake training from 1.6.1987 to 7.6.1987. It has been stated in the writ petition that on 4.8.198, he went on leave as he had fallen sick and a prayer was made to extend his leave vide letter dated 16.8.1987. It is then stated that petitioner reported before the Ghazipur depot on 2.9.1987 but he was not allowed to join. Petitioner states that he made subsequent representations on 3.2.1988 and thereafter on 5.6.1996, and 7.4.1997 but no decision was taken in the matter. Present writ petition has thus been filed.
(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed in which it is stated that petitioner was deputed to function as conductor of Bus No. UHK -347. On 4.8.1987, while bus was checked it was found that 22 passengers out of 36, travelling in the bus were not having any ticket. It is stated that facts were verified and the name of petitioner was struck off from the waiting list vide order dated 17.9.1987. It is stated that in such circumstances, petitioner had no right to work as he was merely placed in the waiting list and on account of the facts noticed above, his name was struck off from the waiting list.;