1987 PLP 766 (PLC)

Admittedly the applicant was appointed by the Respondent as temporary worker vide appointment letter dated 12‑5‑1985. Annexure 'A' to the main petition. Subsequently the aforesaid employment was extended for another 3 months commencing from 12‑8‑1985 vide Annexure 'B' to the grievance petition. Finally on 7‑11‑1985 letter Annexure 'C' was issued by the Respondent informing the appointee that his services would stand terminated on the close of work on 11‑11‑1985. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, grievance notice Annexure "R" to the grievance petition was addressed to the Respondents, who replied it vide Annexure 'F' to the grievance petition. In view of cold response from the Respondent, applicant filed the present grievance petition with the prayer that the Respondent be directed to reinstate him in service with full back benefits. Reply statement was filed wherein it was submitted that the applicant was purely temporary worker employed for a specific period. That after the expiry of the aforesaid period, the services of the applicant were terminated. It was further submitted that on 12‑11‑1985 applicant received a sum of Rs.1,366.63 only as full and final settlement towards his legal dues vide receipts Annexure R/2 to the Reply statement. Applicant filed his affidavit‑in‑evidence Ex.3, and produced no other witness. On 26‑11‑1986 the Respondents moved an application Ex.4 to the effect that since the applicant had admitted factual and legal position in his cross‑examination, hence it was not necessary for the Respondent to file any affidavit‑in‑evidence. Accordingly on the same date the Respondent closed his side. After hearing both the learned counsel I have reached to the following conclusion. Admittedly applicant was appointed as a temporary worker vide Annexure 'A' to the grievance petition. Perusal of the appointment order Annexure 'A' further indicates that the temporary appointment was to last for a period of three months w.e.f. 12‑5‑1985. There is nothing in the appointment order in the affidavit‑in‑evidence or the grievance petition of the applicant to show that the appointment of the applicant was against w post of permanent nature‑ Letter dated 7‑10‑1985 Annexure 'E' to the grievance petition indicates that the temporary employment of the applicant was extended for a period of another three months commencing from 12‑8‑1985. As such the employment was to last upto 11‑11‑1985. On 7‑11‑1985, termination order Annexure 'C' to the grievance petition was given to the applicant whereby he was informed that in accordance with the appointment letter, the services of the applicant would stand terminated on close of work on 11‑11‑1985. Thereafter on 12‑11‑1985 the applicant also received his legal dues vide receipt Annexure R/2 to the Reply statement. In my view the above admitted facts clearly show the services of the applicant were validly terminated in accordance with the explicit terms of appointment. There is nothing on record to show that the applicant was appointed against a job of permanent nature. Similarly reason of termination of service has also been given in the terminated order, besides the applicant cannot be treated as an aggrieved worker as he has also received all the legal dues towards full and final settlement. Accordingly the present grievance petition is devoid of any force and is hereby dismissed. A. E./975/Lb.S.??????????? Petition dismissed.