- (1.) The petitioner has challenged the order of the U. P. Public Services Tribunal by which the petitioner's reference of claim was dismissed on 28-9-1978 as infructuous and also the order dismissing the petitioner's application for review of that order.
(2.) The petitioner has also prayed for a writ to quash the order by which the petitioner has been reverted from the post of Assistant Consolidation Officer to the post of Consolidator. This order was challenged by the petitioner even earlier by way of a writ petition and this court had dismissed it on the ground of the availability of alternative remedy to the petitioner under the U. P. Public Services (Tribunals) Act.
(3.) The petitioner had filed a reference of claim before the Tribunal and on 25-9-1978 moved an application for withdrawal of the reference. This application was taken up by the Tribunal on 28-9-1978 but the petitioner was not present. It is not necessary here to decide the controversy if the petitioner had knowledge of this date or not. On 28-9-1978 the Tribunal passed the following order: "Neither the petitioner nor his counsel appeared for hearing on the application D/- 25-9-1978 whereby it was prayed that the petition be allowed to be withdrawn. The petition is dismissed as infructuous." The petitioner feeling aggrieved filed an application for review of the order dated 28-9-1978 but this application was dismissed by the Tribunal on 17-2-1979 (Annexure 15). We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned chief standing counsel for the respondent and they have no objection to the petition being disposed of today as the decision is based on controversial facts.;