T.S. Doabia, J.The appellant came to be appointed in pursuance of the approval granted by the Deputy Secretary to Government in Power Development Department. The order passed on 17th October. 1988 was to the following effect:

Government of Jammu and Kashmir.

Power Development Department.

The Chief Engineer.

Maintenance and RE Wing,

Srinagar.

No. PDDVI/Engage/87

Dated: 17101988

Sir.

I am directed to convey approval to the engagement of Shri Abdul Rashid Lone S/O Sidiq Lone R/O Kehnusa, Tehsil Bandipora as Class IV employee on regular temporary basis after verification of requisite certificates and completion of the formalities.

Yours faithfully, (Paramjit Singh)

Deputy Secretary to Government, Power Development Department."

2. Later on his services were brought to an end. This was done at the instance of Executive Engineer. He found that the work and conduct of the appellant was not satisfactory. He, accordingly, directed that the services of the appellant be brought to an end. The appellant came to this Court.

The stand taken by the respondent in the counter filed in the writ petition is to the following effect:

i) that the appellant was appointed as Class IV employee for a period of 89 days only on 4th February, 1988;

ii) that after the expiry of the term, his tenure was extended by another order. This was also for a period of 89 days:

iii) that thereafter another extension was granted. This was again for a period of 89 days;

iv) Again an order of extension was passed. This was done vide order dated: 30011989. But effect to this order was not given as the Executive Engineer, who was the immediate officer of the appellant was of the opinion that the work of the appellant was not satisfactory.

3. It be seen that the order which was originally passed on 17th October, 1988 was to the effect that the appellant would stand appointed against regular temporary post. If this be the position then the subsequent order by which his tenure was curtailed to 89 days was not justified. This is one aspect of the matter.

4. The other aspect of the matter is that the appellant came to be appointed pursuant to the order passed by the Deputy Secretary to Government, Power Development Department. If his services were to be brought to an end, then the least that was required to be done was that the appellant had to be put to notice by same Deputy Secretary or an officer of the same status. The order has been passed by the person who was not competent. Even otherwise, if the services of the appellant were required to be brought to en end on the ground that his performance was not satisfactory, he should have been put to notice.

We are. accordingly, of the view that:

i) the order was not passed by a competent authority:

ii) that the order imposes a stigma on the appellant.

5. In view of the above, this appeal is allowed. The judgment of the learned Single Judge is reversed. The appellant is held entitled to reinstatement. We. however, are not passing any order for backwages. It is not possible in these proceedings to ascertain whether or not the appellant was engaged in any gainful employment during this period. The appellant may represent in this regard to the State and the Slate would pass orders on the same. Appellant would be entitled to all other consequential benefits.

6. Disposed of accordingly.