High CourtsSingle Bench

Bhura Ram vs State of Rajasthan and Others

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 4 March 1992 · Citation: (1992) WLN 551

HON’BLE JUDGES
B.R. Arora, J
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No. 303 of 1983
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 368 words

B.R. Arora, J.—The petitioner was appointed as Gram Sewak cum Paden Sachiv in the Gram Panchayat, Bandra, Panchayat Samiti, Baitu, district Barmer, on December 22, 1982, for a fixed term on purely temporary basis till the duly selected persons by the District Selection Committee are made available. The services of the petitioner were thereafter, after the expiry of the period, were terminated alongwith other persons by the respondents vide telegraphic communication dated February 17,1983. Dissatisfied with the order, removing the petitioner from the service, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

2.

At the time of admitting the writ petition, the status quo, as it existed on February 1, 1983, was mainted.

3.

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Deputy Government Advocate.

4.

It is not in dispute that the appointment of the petitioner was purely temporary and was for a fixed term. It was made clear in the order giving appointment to the petitioner that his services can be terminated at any time if the selected persons are made available. If the selected candidates from, the District Selection Committee were made available and the services of the petitioner have been terminated on the ground of availability of the selected candidates, then the petitioner is not entitled for any relief as the appointment given to the petitioner was a conditional appointment, subject to the availability of the selected candidates. If the selected candidates have not been made available and the petitioner is still continuing in service then he may be allowed to continue in service till the selected candidates are made available and his continuation in the service will not create any right in favour of the petitioner. But if the selected candidates have already been made available then the services of the petitioner can be terminated.

5.

It may, however, be observed that if the petitioner fulfils the necessary qualification for the appointment on the post of Gram Sewak cum Paden Sachiv and is eligible for the consideration then his case may be considered alongwith other persons for giving him appointment, on the post of Gram Sewak cum Paden Sachiv.

6.

With these observations, the writ petition, filed by the petitioner, is disposed of.