Construction Corporation, but such appointment has been denied by respondents in reply to writ petition. However, the petitioner has not placed on record any order of appointment. 4. The petitioner has come up with a case that his services were terminated w.e.f. 17-8-1985, however, he raised an industrial dispute, which was referred to Labour Court Bharatpur and vide award dated 28-7-1994, the termination of petitioner was declared illegal and invalid and he was ordered to be reinstated in service with continuity of service. The award dated 28-7-1994 has been stated to be affirmed by the High Court while dismissing the writ petition No.5921/1994 vide order dated 7-11-1994. In representation dated 2-4-1999 (Ann.11) it has been averred by the petitioner that in compliance of the award dated 28-7-1994 the Resident Engineer, Unit (ix) vide order dated 16-1-1995 instructed the petitioner to join duties, pursuant thereto the petitioner joined his duties w.e.f. 28-1-1995. It has been averred in representation that the Resident Engineer Unit (ix) vide order dated 11-3-1996 transferred the petitioner to join in the office of Resident Engineer Unit (xvi), pursuant thereto the petitioner joined in the office of Resident Engineer unit (xvi) on 12-3-1996 and continuously rendering his duties.
