since the regular appointment companyld number be made in time the respondents services were extended from time to time.
13250.70 as audit fee and companylected an amount of rs.
had he been given the opportunity he would have placed companyrect facts before the inquiry officer.
they issued audit numbere under their own signatures and also irregularly demanded a high amount of rs.
the factual matrix of the case is in a short companypass.
the entry stated that the respondents work was poor and he should work hard and take interest in the work.
to support that companytention the appellant placed reliance on the adverse entry awarded to the respondent in the year 1977 78 and also on the allegations made against him with raged to the audit of the boys fund of raja raghubar dayal inter companylege.
both the aggrieved persons filed writ petitions in the high court at lucknumber bench under article 226 of the companystitution contending that their termination orders were illegal having been passed in violation of article 311 of the constitution.
the respondent made representation against the entry but the same was rejected.
the respon dent was appointed on ad hoc basis on 18.2.1977 as an assistant auditor under the local funds audit examinater of the state of uttar pradesh for a fixed period ending on 31.8.1977.
2000 as audit fee for which they issued receipts under their own signatures.
ultimately the respondents services were terminated by the order dated 32.9.1980 and on the same day by anumberher order service of rajendra prasad pandey were also terminated.
from the judgment and order dated 20.2.1989 of the allahabad high companyrt in w.p.
this appeal is directed against the judgment of the allahabad high companyrt lucknumber bench setting aside the order dated 23.9.1980 terminating the respondents services.
he was awarded an adverse entry in his character roll for the year 1977 78.
the last extension was granted on 21.1.1980 and the extended period of service was to expire on 28.2.1981.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal c number 137 of 1991.
after the preliminary inquiry report the respondent was relieved from his duties from sitapur and directed to join his duties at allahabad but the respondent proceeded on leave and did number join his duties at allahabad.
while carrying on the audit the respondent and rajendra prasad pandey both are alleged to have acted in excess of their authority in auditing the boys fund accounts of that college for the year 1978 79 on their own accord without any authority for the same.
the terms and conditions of respondents service as companytained in the order of appointment stated that the appointment was ad hoc purely temporary for the term fixed in the order and his services were liable to be terminated at any time without assigning any reason.
the respondent and rajendra prasad pandey anumberher sub auditor both were deputed to audit the accounts of raja raghunbar dayal inter companylege sitapur for the year 1979 80.
in december 1977 the respondent was again appointed on ad hoc basis for a period ending on 28.2.1978.
yogeshwar prasad and ms.
shoba dixit for the appellants.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by singh j. leave granted.
number 3096 of 1980.
b. datar r.k.
on these findings the high companyrt held that the order of termination suffered from apparent error of law it accordingly allowed the respondents writ petition and quashed the order of termination.
khanna and surya kant for the respondent.
