With reference to your letter No.
Meanwhile by G.O. No.
It is admitted that the respondents in both these appeals were appointed temporarily.
Appeals by special leave from the judgments and decrees dated February 12, 1965 and November 10, 1964 of the Allahabad High Court in Special Appeals Nos.
His writ petition was accepted by the learned single judge and the impugned order was set aside.
309 referred to earlier.
Hence we shall quote the same in full O. No.
On May 22, 1956 the Governor was pleased to issue G.O. No.
That order was affirmed by a division bench.
He companytinued to serve in that department as Sales tax Officer until the year 1951 on temporary basis.
We shall refer to the facts of Civil Appeal No.
April 1, 1955, of sixty one temporary posts of S.T.0s, in the scale of Rs.
1011 of 1966 thereafter, briefly.
1012 of 1966 .
The services of the respondent Babu Singh Gaur were terminated, by giving him one months numberice, on September 12, 1958.
The charge on the above account should be debited to the relevant primary Units under the head 13 other taxes and Duties.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Hegde, J. These are appeals by special leave.
1012 of 1966, Jugal Kishore Bhatt was appointed as the Sales tax Officer on June 29, 1948 by the Governor of U.P. At the time of his appointment the posts of Sales tax Officers were temporary posts.
ST 2562/X 911 dated May 22, 1956 from the Deputy Secretary to Government to Commr.
1011 of 1966, the respondent therein was appointed as a temporary Panchayat Raj Inspector on June 6, 1949.
The respondent represented against the numberice terminating his service but his representation was rejected.
ST 896/X 911 D/55 dated April 27, 1955, the Governor was pleased to sanction the extension of the posts of Sales tax Officers up to March 31, 1956.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos.
On May 1, 1958, the State Government terminated the services of the respondent by giving him one months numberice.
II, Part II with retrospective effect from the date of their first appointment to those posts.
Thereafter he companytinued in service up to March 31, 1954.
298 of 1960 and 483 of 1962 respectively.
Officers appointed temporarily under the Panchayat Raj scheme were also declared to hold their temporary posts in a substantive capacity, within the meaning of the order of the Governor regarding Fundamental Rule 26 d of the Financial Handbook Vol.
The government has appealed against that order.
The respondent in Civil Appeal No.
Thereafter he challenged the order of his termination before the Allahabad High Court by means of a writ petition under Art.
He joined the service in the Sales tax department at Bareilly on July 15, 1948.
ST 2562/x 911 A. This G O.is important.
Subsequently his appointment was extended for a period of one year from April 1, 1954 to March 31, 1955.
We shall set out those facts in detail.
The temporary posts under the Panchayat Raj Scheme were companyverted into Permanent posts subsequently.
and officiating service in a permanent post, under the U.P. government.
P. Rana, for the appellants in both the appeals .
Charges in companynection with the U.P. Sales Tax Act 1948 in the budget.
The respondent signified his companysent for reappointment on the terms mentioned in the letter.
1011 and 1012 of 1966.
Sometime in February 1953, the respondent was informed by the Commissioner of Sales tax, U.P. that his appointment would terminate on March 31, 1953 but he companyld be re employed in the post but he will be subject to the rule set out earlier.
226 of the Constitution.
Sales Tax.
Hence it is companyvenient to companysider them together.
Nothing in this rule shall apply to a government servant engaged on companytract b government servant number in whole time employment c government servant paid out of companytingencies d persons employed in work charged establishments.
A companymon question of law arises for decision in these two appeals.
They were also made subject to the rule made under Art.
In this rule temporary service means officiating and substantive service in a temporary post.
N. Dixit and 0.
Babu Singh Gaur also challenged his termination by means of a writ petition under Art.
E 1 Cent 13 13814/ST dated Feb. 13, 1956, I am directed to companyvey the sanction of the Governor to the companyversion, w.e.f.
The respondent was asked to intimate to the Government by March 23, 1953 whether he was prepared to be reemployed from April 1, 1953 on the said terms.
Subject Conversion of sixty one temporary posts of S.T.O. into permanent one.
P. Goyal and R. K. Bhatt, for the intervener in C.A. No.
His appointment was on temporary basis.
1012 of 1966.
S. Barlingay, M. K. Pandey, S. K. Sabharwal and Ganpat Rai, for the respondents in both the appeals .
Aggrieved by that order, the government has brought this appeal.
