SHETHNA, J. - (1.) ON 5. 11. 82, the appellant/original petitioner was appointed on the post of Diesel Mechanic Instructor for a period of three months or till the regular selected candidate was available. His services were extended for a further period of one month by an order dated 10. 2. 83. ONce again his services were extended upto 31. 3. 83. ON 31. 3. 83, his services were terminated.
(2.) HE was once again appointed on the aforesaid post on 19. 10. 1984 for a period of 89 days or till the regular selected candidate was available. His services were extended for a further period of one month by an order dated 22. 1. 85. He was once again appointed on the aforesaid post by an order dated 17. 10. 86 but this time for a period of six months on temporary basis. Thereafter, his services were terminated by an order dated 8. 4. 87 with effect from 24. 4. 87. By an order dated 1. 5. 87, he was once again appointed on the aforesaid post upto 31. 7. 87 and his services were terminated by an order dated 31. 7. 87. Once again he was appointed vide order dated 17. 7. 89 but this time on a different post of Pump Repairing Institute for a period of three months or till the regularly selected candidate was made available. The same was extended for a period of three months or till the end of current session by an order dated 18. 10. 89 which was further extended upto 21. 1. 90. However, his services were terminated on 12. 1. 90 and thereafter once again, he was appointed on the aforesaid post by order dated 22. 1. 90 which was later on terminated by an order dated 20. 4. 90 with effect from 21. 4. 90. He was once again appointed on the aforesaid post by an order dated 23. 4. 90 upto 31. 5. 90 or till regular selected candidates are made available. His services were terminated by an order dated 30. 5. 90 with effect from 31. 5. 90. He was once again appointed by an order dated 27. 7. 92 but this time on the post of Pump Operator Instructor for a period of four months. His services were again terminated by an order dated 19. 8. 92. Thereafter, he was once again appointed by an order dated 24. 8. 92 on the post of Junior Inspector Diesel Mechanic for a period of four months.
(3.) AT that point of time, the petitioner earlier filed writ petition No. 5375/92 before this Court wherein notices were ordered to be issued on 5. 11. 92 and by way of ad-interim order, the respondents were directed not to terminate his services. However, by an order dated 15. 3. 93, his services were terminated. After a period of nearly four years of termination, the petitioner sought permission from the learned Single Judge of this court to withdraw that writ petition with a liberty to file fresh petition. The said permission was granted on 25. 1. 97. Accordingly, the petitioner filed fresh writ petition No. 1318/97 on 20. 3. 97 through his counsel Mr. Mahendra Trivedi. On 4. 1. 99, the learned Single Judge of this Court directed Mr. P. K. Lohra to accept notice for the respondents and after taking suitable instructions file reply. Accordingly, detailed reply affidavit was filed by the respondents. On 20. 3. 2001, another learned Single Judge of this Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant in view of the reply filed by the respondents wherein it was pointed out that the order was properly made. Having gone through the reply filed by the respondents, the learned Single Judge was of the opinion that there was no reason to interfere with such order of termination and the petitioner has no right for regularation. This order is challenged in the special appeal by the appellant. ;