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 · 174 wordsPankaj Purohit, J
Petitioner has challenged the order dated Nil passed by respondent No.3 (annexed as Annexure No.3), whereby, the service of petitioner was brought to an end.
Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner was appointed as Junior Assistant in the Labour Court, Kashiput on 06.06.2024 initially for a period of 11 months which was thereafter extended for further 11 months and the period was expired on 05.04.2026, but, thereafter, the period of his appointment was not extended.
From perusal of the order impugned, it transpires that initial appointment of the petitioner has been done by the then Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Kashipur, without taking prior permission from the State Government in view of the Government Order No.379/XXX(2)/2018/30(12)/ 2018 dated 29.10.2021. Consequently, instead of extending further period of petitioner's engagement, it was brought to an end.
This Court having gone through the order impugned found no illegality, and therefore, no interference is required.
Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed in-limine.
Pending application also stands disposed of.