JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
(2.) According to the petitioner, it is clear from
the order dated 1.6.2006 (Annex.P/2) that the post
of LDC is a sanctioned post and the petitioner's
service has been terminated by order dated
12.12.2009 on the ground that the financial
sanction has not been granted for the post and
consequential order was passed on 21.12.2009.
I perused the order Annex.P/2 which was issued
for all District Collectors and Project Officers
of Banswara, Dungarpur, Karauli, Jhalawar, Sirohi
and Udaipur, whereas per the order of appointment
of the petitioner dated 10.10.2008 (Annex.P/5), it
is clear that the Project Officer of Barmer
clearly stated that the petitioner is being given
appointment on the post of LDC against the post of
Computer Operator on the plea that in other
districts, there are sanctioned posts of LDC. From
the language of the said order itself, it is clear
that the petitioner was given appointment against
a different post and not against the post of LDC
rather the order makes it clear that the post of
LDC was not a sanctioned post for the area of
Barmer and further the document Annex.P/2 is not
related to the area where the petitioner was given
appointment.
(3.) In view of the above, this writ petition,
having no merits, is hereby dismissed.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.