SUDHIR AGARWAL, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri A.K. Saxena, learned counsel for the petitioner.
(2.) THIS writ petition is directed against the order dated 30.7.1991 whereby in purported exercise of power under U.P. Temporary Government Servants (Termination of Service) Rules, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as the "1975 Rules") the petitioner who was appointed on temporary basis on the post of Clerk/Typist was terminated. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the post on which he was appointed was a permanent post and vacancy was filled up after due advertisement for the post, the appointment of petitioner could not be said to be temporary but for all purposes a permanent appointment and, therefore, he could not have been terminated by the impugned order. He further contended that pursuant to the interim order dated 23.9.1991 the petitioner is continuing in service and, therefore, the dismissal of petition will cause serious prejudice to petitioner and so he may be allowed to continue in service. Lastly, he submitted that some other persons were regularised vide order dated 27.8.1984 and, therefore, the petitioner is also entitled for the same treatment.
(3.) FROM the perusal of record it appears that initially after entertaining the writ petition in 1991 the case was listed for the first time only on 18.9.2004 when it was adjourned on account of illness of counsel for the petitioner. Thereafter on 24.9,2004 it was listed before Hon'ble Rakesh Tiwari, J. and while dismissing the writ petition His Lordship was pleased to pass the following order: "When the case was taken up none appeared to press this petition. Heard Standing Counsel and perused the record. Prima fade, there does not appear any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. Interim order, if any, stands vacated." ;