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
8 paragraphs · 184 wordsH.S. Thangkhiew, J
Heard Mr. L.Syiem, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Issue notice.
Dr. N.Mozika, learned DSGI assisted by Ms. M.Myrchiang, learned counsel is present and accepts notice on behalf of the respondents No. 1 & 2 and Mr. N.Syngkon, learned GA accepts notice on behalf of the respondent No. 3.
The grievance of the writ petitioner is with the termination of his employment as Agromet Observer under the Krishi Vigyan Kendra (KVK), a scheme implemented in the State of Meghalaya. It is submitted that similarly situated employees who had also been terminated in other States, by virtue of interim orders operating wherein they had approached their respective High Courts are continuing in service. It is prayed that the writ petitioner also be given the same protection.
Dr. N.Mozika, learned DSGI assisted by Ms. M.Myrchiang, learned counsel on behalf of the respondents No. 1 & 2 prays for and is allowed to obtain instructions and that interim matter be considered on the next date.
Accordingly, two weeks’ time is allowed.
List this matter on 27-03-2025 for instructions and for consideration of the interim prayer.