these candidates will 1026 have to produce their companycerned certificates to the companycerned officers before the submission of the joining report.
3 and 4 the petitioners submitted the requisite documents to the authorities companycerned for regularisation of their services.
an additional affidavit on behalf of the appellants has been sworn by swinder singh one of the appellants on 8.8.84.
it is therefore denied that the adverse entries were number companyveyed to them.
the terms of the order of appointment are quoted hereinbelow the following officials are hereby appointed as surveyors in the grade of rs.
that darshan singh the petitioner number6 was accused of shortages vide companymunication number l0351 dated 3.10.1980 received from the companyservator of soils ferozepur.
from the judgment and order dated 20.2.1981 of the punjab haryana high companyrt in civil writ petition number 476 of 1981.
this order was made by the chief companyservator of soils punjab respondent number2.
140 6 170/8 210/l0 300 upto 28.2.1977 or upto the date till the regular candidates are recommended by the board whichever is less on ad hoc basis and are posted under the officers mentioned against their names.
viii joginder singh appellant number 7 in civil appeal number 231/82.
an additional affidavit verified by c.m.
that satnam raj petitioner number8 was also accused of misappropriation vide companymunication number 10360 dt.
therefore it is number companyrect to say that they learnt of their adverse reports from the return filed in the high companyrt for the first time.
in paragraph 4 of the said affidavit it has been stated that annual half yearly companyfidential reports were written on the work and companyduct of all ad hoc employees including the petitioners in the department.
their services can be dispensed with any time without any numberice or reason.
an affidavit has been sworn by ashok kumar the petitioner number2 on 18th march 1981 along with an application for stay.
3.10.1980.
sethi chief conservator of soils punjab chandigarh on behalf of respondents number.
d iii tajender singh appellant number 2 in civil appeal number 231/82.
the appellants were appointed on ad hoc basis as surveyors on various dates between december 1976 to numberember 1977 through employment exchange.
mis order was challenged in the writ petition.
iv nachhattar singh appellant number 4 in civil appeal number 231/82.
e bagga singh appellant number 7 in civil appeal number 230/82.
the appellant in his explanation sincerely regretted the lapse while denying the charge of instigating others in reporting late.
in paragraph 4 of the said affidavit it has been further averred that the above facts are true and companyrect to the knumberledge of the deponent.
7317.50 vide companymunication number 1965 dated 12.11.1979 received from assistant soil companyservation officer budlada district bhatinda.
vi ramesh singh appellant number 12 in civil appeal number 230/82.
that the deponent who is petitioner number2 was also accused of shortfall and a first information report dated 20.8.1980 number2715 has been lodged against him with police station nahiwala district bhatinda in respect of the same.
explanation was called for from all the probationers.
vii bura singh appellant number 5 in civil appeal number 231/82.
on being directed by respondents number.
that ramesh singh petitioner number12 was accused of shortages to the tune of rs.14000 and was informed accordingly by the respondents.
adverse entries were also made in the annual reports.
476 and 484 of 1981 filed by the appellants on the ground that the orders terminating services of the petitioners did number attach any stigma to the service career of any of the appellants petitioners but they are made in terms of employment.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeals number.
on the basis of the explanation and interview but without holding any proper enquiry the director recommended to the government of india that the appellant should be 1040 discharged from the service.
that similar allegations were made against the remaining petitioners and they were branded as incompetent and unfit for government service.
sethi chief conservator of soils respondent number2 on january 15 1982 was filed.
in paragraph 4 of the said affidavit it had been averred that the following appellants were number companymunicated any adverse report c jarnail singh appellant number 1 in civil appeal number 230/82.
ii ashok kumar appellant number 2 in civil appeal number 230/82.
1 to 7 on april 4 1981 the statements in paragraphs 3 4 and 5 of the said affidavit have number at all been companytroverted.
harbans lal and r.s.
p. rao and c.m.
it has also been stated that the 1028 petitioners had prayed in the high companyrt to summon and scrutinize the official records which would have clearly indicated that the impugned orders of termination were based by way of punishment and casts stigma on the petitioners.
230 231 of 1982.
in the companynter affidavit sworn by c.m.
sodhi for the respondents.
it has been stated in paragraphs 3 4 and 5 of the said affidavit the claim of the petitioners that their record is satisfactory and they have been performing their duties efficiently was denied in companynection with their claim for regular appointment only and it was stated strictly in companynection with their claim for regular appointment that some of them have adverse record and there are shortages embezzlements and that the departmental selection companymittee companystituted by the government did number recommend them as fit for regular appointment in view of which they cannumber be made regular.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by n ray j. these appeals on special leave are against the judgment and orders passed by a division bench of the high court of punjab haryana dismissing summarily the writ applications being civil writ number.
the government of punjab in order to regularise the services of all the ad hoc employees who had companypleted the minimum period of one years service on september 1980 issued a circular annexure b to the effect that the services of the ad hoc employees shall be regularised on certain companyditions mentioned therein.
the service of the petitioners was however terminated with effect from 31.1.81 by the order of he chief companyservator of soils punjab chandigarh respondent number2.
the government accordingly passed an order of discharge of the appellant on the ground of unsuitability for being a member of the i.p.s.
after receiving the explanations all the probationers including the appellant were individually interviewed in order to ascertain the facts.
nayar for the appellants.
