AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
S. Harkauli, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel representing respondents Nos. 1, 2 and 3. The petitioner is being supported by respondent No. 2, according to learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.
The petitioner was appointed on short term vacancy in the year 1997. The approval was refused. Earlier Writ Petition was filed, in pursuance of which representation has been decided by order dated 2422000 and approval has been refused again. After examining the record and hearing the learned Standing Counsel I am of the opinion that the impugned order cannot be sustained. The short term vacancy are not within the purview of the Commission. The Removal of Difficulties Order of 1999 cannot affect appointment in the year 1997. No detail of the alleged ban of appointment has been mentioned in the impugned order.
The Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned order is hereby quashed. The matter is remanded back to the respondent No. 1 with a direction to decide the matter afresh within a month.