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 · 227 wordsD.S. Sinha, J.—Heard Sri Puneet Kumar Gupta, holding brief of Sri Wajahat Husain Khan, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner.
This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 18th January 1986 whereby the service of the Petitioner, a temporary employee of the State of Uttar Pradesh, has been terminated in accordance with the provisions of the U.P. Temporary Government Servants (Termination of Services) Rules, 1975, hereinafter called the service rules.
It is not in dispute that the status of the Petitioner was that of a temporary employee and that his service was liable to termination in terms of the aforesaid Service Rules.
In its decision rendered in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh and Another Vs. Kaushal Kishore Shukla, , the Hon''ble Supreme Court has univocally ruled that a temporary employee has no right on the post and his services are liable to be terminated in accordance with the service rules and terms of contract of service. In the instant case, the service of the Petitioner has been terminated in accordance with the Service Rules.
Thus, no case for interference with the impugned order by this Court in exercise of its special and extraondinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been made out.
The petition is, therefore, dismissed in limine.