@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER
Narayan Roy, J.@mdashHeard counsel for the parties. This application is directed against the order, as contained in annexure 5, whereby and whereunder the petitioners have been terminated.
2. It appears that the petitioners were engaged under Leprosy Eradication Scheme on temporary basis and the project was to run on the basis of assistance received from non-governmental agencies from different countries and also from the fund received from the World Bank. After sometime, a decision was taken by the State Government on the basis of the instruction, issued by the Central Government, to discharge one third of the staff every year in view of administrative cost and pursuant to that the petitioners have been terminated.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, however, is not in a position to show that the petitioners were appointed on substantive basis, rather it is stated that under a particular scheme they were engaged. Learned counsel further submitted that allowances admissible to them have not been paid.
4. In paragraph 13 of the counter affidavit, it is stated that the petitioners were paid their remuneration for the period up to March 2003, by which time they were terminated.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and for the reasons aforementioned, I do not find any merit in this application.
6. It is, accordingly, dismissed. However, in case, allowances permissible to the petitioners have not been paid to them, they may represent before the competent authority for the same, which would be disposed of in accordance with law.
