IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. S.B.Civil Writ Petition No. 568/1995. Bal Hit Shiksha Samiti, through its Secretary, Swamy Dayanand Marg, Alwar & Others. Versus. Raj. Non-Government Educational Institut6ions Tribunal, Jaipur & Others. Date of Judgment: 26.2.2009. Hon'ble Mr.Justice Mohammad Rafiq. Mr.Ajay Tantia for the petitioner. Mr.None present for the respondents. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner by challenging the order dated 20.10.1994 passed by Rajasthan Non Government Educational Institution Tribunal, Jaipur by which the learned Tribunal has set-aside the order dated 31.12.1993 by which the services of respondent No.2 were terminated. ..2.. This case was called out twice. When in the second round, no one appeared on behalf of the respondents, arguments of the counsel for the petitioner were heard and arguments of the respondents were examined from reply to writ petition. Mr.J.R.Tantia learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the respondent No.2 was engaged on temporary basis as Gardener with the petitioner on consolidated pay of Rs.300/- per month initially on 26.12.1984. His services were extended from time to time till 31.12.1993 by issuing various orders. In this manner he served with petitioner up to 31.12.1993. His services were not extended after 31.12.1993 because the petitioner did not require any Gardener. It was argued that the case of the respondent No.2 does not fall within the ..3.. purview of Section 19 & 21 of the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Act. It is further submitted that the provisions of Section 18 of the Act are not applicable to the temporary employees. It is further submitted that respondent N0.2 had been employed with petitioner for a short term employment and the respondent No.2 has not improved his working and conduct and as such, the petitioner did not extend the services of the respondent No.2. It is submitted that the respondent No.2 was engaged as part time employee and he does not fall within the purview of Section 19 & 21 of the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Act 1989 and Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Rules 1993. ..4.. Learned counsel in support of his arguments relied upon the judgment of this Court in Kiran Bharti Vs. The Non-Government Educational Institutions Tribunal & Ors reported in 2005 (5) RLW 924 wherein this Court while dismissing the writ petition in the aforesaid judgment held that provisions of Section 18 and Rule 39 were not attracted in case of termination of adhoc temporary appointment. It was also held that the petitioner is estopped from challenging the term of her appointment after completing the tenure. Although no one was appeared on behalf of the respondent, in the reply filed by the respondent it is has been contended that the Tribunal has rightly reached the conclusion that the provisions of Section 18 of the Act of 1989 are applicable even to adhoc employee. ..5.. In view of the above arguments and the view taken by the coordinate Bench of this Court in Kiran Bharti Vs. Non-Government Educational Institutions Tribunal & Ors (Supra), the present petition deserves to be succeed. This Court in Kiran Bharti's case (Supra) held that temporary and adhoc employee at the time of removal, is not entitled to challenge the same under Section 18 of the Act. In view of the above, this writ petition is allowed. The impugned order Dated 20.10.1994 passed by Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions is set-aside. Copy of this judgment be endorsed to the petitioner for information. (Mohammed Rafiqu)J. k.