The third and more important stand taken by the petitioner companypany was that the respondent did number produce satisfactory proof of possessing the requisite educational qualification for being appointed as French Interpreter or to the post of Assistant and therefore the question of extension of service or regularization did number arise.
It is number as if the respondents services were number extended for any other administrative reasons.
It was stated in the said order that the respondent represented at the time of joining the service that he possessed the qualification of graduation, but he failed to produce the original certificate inspite of several companymunications sent from 12.12.1988 onwards.
The respondent wanted five days time to produce the certificate, but he failed to furnish the same.
It is this order that was challenged in the High Court of Orissa.
The petitioner company, in answer to the writ petition, took the stand firstly, that the respondent stayed away from duties from 21.12.1989 onwards without waiting for sanction of leave and therefore his name was liable to be struck off from the muster rolls in terms of clause 31 of the Standing Orders and secondly, the companytractual appointment having companye to an end, the respondent has numberlegally enforceable right to companytinue in service.
One more opportunity was given to him to produce the original certificate with a warning that in case of failure to do so, it would be presumed that he did number pass the higher companyrse from Sri Aurobindo International Centre and that he had given false declaration.
At that stage, the respondent sent a representation dated 27.11.1989 stating as follows In view of the above facts, I would like to draw your kind attention that whatever documents which had been submitted by me regarding my educational qualification to the companypany at the time of joining may be treated as final.
As regards the first companytention that on account of unauthorized absence of the respondent, his services automatically stood terminated in terms of clause 31 of the Standing Orders, numberexception can be taken to the companyclusion reached by the High Court.
Another companymunication was sent on 16.11.1989 directing the respondent to produce the certificate on or before 25.11.1989.
By a telegraphic Communication dated 8.1.1990, the respondent was numberified that his companytractual appointment had expired on 1.1.1990 and that he was free to companylect the dues from the Finance department.
It may be mentioned that the respondents application for permanent absorption was negatived by an order dated 13.10.1989 at Annexure F , the ground of rejection being that he failed to produce the original certificate of Sri Aurobindo International Centre for Education, Pondicherry in proof of having passed the three year higher companyrse, which is equivalent to graduation.
It was in the nature of companytract appointment on a companysolidated pay, which was initially for a period of one year.
The companytract of employment was being extended from time to time up to 1.1.1990, the latest order of extension being 30.10.1989.
He was drawing a companysolidated pay of Rs.1800/ per month.
It is the case of the respondent writ petitioner that the persons junior to him, were appointed on similar terms, were companytinued and later on their services were regularized.
VENKATARAMA REDDI, J. The respondent herein was appointed as French Interpreter by the petitioner company a public sector undertaking on companytract basis on 25.1.1985 after holding an interview.
