Summary
After termination of his temporary service and subsequent acquittal, the employee consciously sought and accepted fresh appointment on an express undertaking relinquishing claims to past service. The Court held that he could not thereafter reopen the termination and obtain continuity of service. It allowed the State’s appeal and set aside the High Court’s continuity direction.
Issues
- Whether an employee who accepted fresh appointment while expressly relinquishing past-service claims could later challenge the earlier termination and claim continuity.
Held
- The employee’s request for fresh appointment expressly disclaimed claims connected with prior service, and the appointment was made on that specific condition. His conscious acceptance barred the later challenge to termination and claim for continuity. (¶ 6–7)
- The High Court erred in entertaining and allowing that challenge despite the unequivocal undertaking. The Supreme Court set aside the direction granting continuity from the 9 April 1984 termination. (¶ 7–8)
Result
State’s appeal allowed; High Court judgment and continuity-of-service direction set aside; no costs.