- (1.) This appeal is directed against the order of the Single Bench, whereby the relief of reinstatmeent in service was declined while the respondent was directed to pay to the petitioner his salary for the remaining two months with interest @ 6% per annum.
(2.) The appellant had applied for the post of Proof Reader in pursuance to the advertisement (Annexure-1) issued by the respondent wherein candidates were required to apply till 30.06.1998. The appellant submitted his application on 29.06.1998 and he was called for interview vide letter dated 13.05.1999. The appellant was initially appointed for a period of three months on contractual basis on a consolidated salary of Rs.5250/- per month vide order dated 31.05.1999. The term of the appellant was extended initially upto 07.12.1999 and subsequently till 31.03.2000 vide order dated 22.12.1999. Thereafter, the services of the appellant were discontinued. This action of the respondent was challenged by the appellant by preferring the writ petition, which has been partly allowed vide the impugned order.
(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that as the appellant had been duly appointed in terms of the advertisement issued by the respondent, his services could not have been terminated on the expiry of just ten months especially when the advertisement had been issued inviting application for appointment for a period of one year. Learned counsel has relied upon judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Commissioner, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan & Ors. vs. Anil Kumar Singh & Ors., 2003 10 SCC 284, and Secretary, H.S.E.B. vs. Suresh & Ors, 1999 3 SCC 601.;