( 1 ) SPECIAL leave granted. ( 2 ) HEARD counsel for the parties. ( 3 ) IN the instant case, the respondent was appointed as Homoeopathic Medical Officer and he was issued a notice dated December 13, 1977 informing that his services would be terminated with effect from January 31, 1978. The respondent chose to challenge the order of termination by filing an OA in 1992. The Tribunal by order dated November 23, 1995 directed that a representation be filed with the State Government. The said representation was filed and the same was rejected. The respondent again approached the Tribunal and the Tribunal purporting to follow orders which had granted relief to other claimants allowed the OA and directed the appellant herein to appoint the respondent as a Homoeopathic Medical Officer with retrospective effect with all service benefits. ( 4 ) IN our opinion, there were two fundamental errors in that relief being granted to the respondent. Firstly, the services of the respondent were terminated with effect from January 31, 1978 and the respondent did not approach the Tribunal within the period of limitation provided by the statute. On this ground alone, the tribunal should not have entertained the appeal. Secondly, the respondent was appointed on February 1, 1972 on contract basis for a period of three years. This period of contract was extended up to January 31, 1978. When the respondent was only a contractual employee, there could be no question of his being granted the relief of being directed to be appointed as a regular employee. ( 5 ) FOR the aforesaid reasons, this appeal is allowed and the orders of the High Court and the Tribunal are set aside, the effect of which would be that the OA filed by the respondent before the Tribunal would stand dismissed. ( 6 ) NO costs.