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
7 paragraphs · 249 wordsAjay Mohan Goel, J
By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following substantive reliefs:-
"(i) That the impugned action of the respondents whereby the services of the applicant has been terminated vide Annexure P-7 dated 26.02.2015 may kindly be quashed and set aside, in the interest of law, equity and justice.
(ii) That the respondents may kindly be directed to allow the applicant to discharge his duties and consider the case of the present applicant for regularization in view of the policy of the State Government."
When this case was taken up for consideration today, Mr. Surender Thakur, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No. 5, on instructions, informs the Court that keeping in view the performance of the petitioner, respondent No. 5 has taken a conscious decision to continue with the services of the petitioner. His statement is taken on record and the writ petition stands disposed of in view of the same.
At this stage, Mr. Amit Singh Chandel, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that disposal of this petition should not come in the way of the petitioner in case he intends to approach the competent authority with the prayer of regularization of his services. It is observed that disposal of this petition shall not come in the way of the petitioner for making any such representation with regard to regularization of his services to the competent authority.
Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.