Hence, even though her services in the Panchayat Rural Development Department were terminated on 29.3.2004, she approached the High Court only after lapse of a period of one year and two months.
It appears that in order to appoint the Project Director, certain names requisitioned from the Employment Exchange, were companysidered and respondent number1 was selected and appointed temporarily, vide letter dated 8.11.1996 on a fixed salary of Rs.4,000/ per month.
Her services in the Panchayat Rural Development Department were number required, and she was repatriated vide order dated 29.3.2004 to her parent department.
Salary of respondent number1 was increased from Rs.4,000/ to Rs.8,000/ per month vide Order dated 16.7.1999.
The post of Project Director was advertised on 16.5.2005.
Respondent number1 joined a post in the Panchayat Rural Development Department in Zila Panchayat, Indore in pursuance of the order dated 29.7.2003, passed by the Government of Madhya Pradesh.
Shri B.S. Banthia, learned companynsel for the appellants has submitted that the High Court companymitted an error in allowing the said writ petition as respondent number1 was merely a temporary employee, and had joined another post under the alleged order of deputation, and had worked there for a period of 9 10 months.
Thus, respondent number1 filed a writ petition on 26.5.2005, challenging the advertisement dated 16.5.2005, claiming her right to join the said post.
She companyld number join as a Project Director in the Society as she had numberlien therein.
Hence, this appeal.
However, respondent number1 was number permitted to join the Society.
Thus, the iHHkkHigh Court ought number to have entertained the writ petition at all.
Aggrieved, the appellants filed a writ appeal, which stood dismissed vide impugned judgment and order dated 5.11.2005.
Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J. Leave granted.
The appellants companytested the writ petition on various grounds, however, the writ petition was allowed by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 17.7.2006.
She had also left the Society without obtaining any previous sanction from the appointing Authority, i.e., the District Collector.
This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 5.11.2008, passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh Indore Bench in Writ Appeal No.86 of 2007, by which it has affirmed the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 17.7.2006, passed in Writ Petition No.1007 of 2006, by which the learned Single Judge quashed the advertisement dated 16.5.2005, inviting the applications for appointment on the post of Project Director.
Facts and circumstances giving rise to this appeal are That the Central Government introduced a scheme for elimination of child labour with respect to which, the Director General of Employment and Training wrote a letter dated 15.7.1995, to the Collector, Khargone West Nimar to implement the aforesaid Scheme.
In order to give effect, i.e., to implement the said Scheme, a society, namely, the Child Labour Elimination Rehabilitation Society hereinafter referred to as the, Society , was formed on 12.4.1996 and the Collector became the ex officio Chairman of the said Society.
She had further, voluntarily abandoned the services of the Society on 29.7.2003 and thereafter, she filed the said writ petition on 26.5.2005, only challenging advertisement dated 16.5.2005.
