P.SRINIVASAN, J. - (1.) This application has been listed before us for admission today.
(2.) The applicant states in his application that he was engaged as a Substitute on 10 -4 -1983 and continued to work till 10 -4 -1987 when he was verbally informed that his services were not required from the next day. No order of appointment in the first instance and no written order terminating his services from 10 -4 -1987 have been attached to this application. The applicant further states that he made representations to the authorities after his services were dispensed with. He has attached copies of representations said to have been made by him on 12 -8 -1987 and again on 3 -6 -1988, 9 -9 -1988 and 25 -2 -1989 all addressed to the Divisional Railway Manager, Eastern Railway, Howrah, in which he prayed that since he had worked already for 120 days, his case for continued appointment and absorption may be considered. The applicant states that he has received no reply to these representations.
(3.) Mr. C. Samaddar, learned Counsel for the Railways submits that there is no proof that the applicant was engaged in the first instance, that his service was dispensed with later or that he actually made any representation. He also submits that he has no instructions on the subject so far. He further submits that this application is barred by limitation and prays that it be dismissed in limine on that ground.;