JUDGMENT Rajiv Sharma, J.- The petitioner was promoted as Junior Scale Stenographer on purely temporary basis in the pay scale of Rs. 1200-2100 on 29.10.1992. Thereafter he was promoted on temporary basis as Senior Scale Stenographer in the pay scale of Rs. 5800-9200 vide office order dated 31.8.2000. He was reverted from the post of Senior Scale Stenographer as one Sh. Kashmir Singh, who had gone on deputation basis in Staff Selection Board, Hamirpur came back to the parent department on 31.5.2001. Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Advocate has strenuously argued that the petitioner has not been served with any notice before the issuance of office order dated 16.10.2001. He then argued that the petitioner has neither misled nor misrepresented the authorities while working on higher post with effect from 1.6.2001 onwards and in these circumstances the recoveries could not be effected from his salary. Mr. R.K. Sharma, learned Senior Additional Advocate General has strenuously argued that the petitioner was promoted on purely temporary/officiating basis as Senior Scale Stenographer. He then argued that since the petitioner was promoted only on officiating basis, no notice was required to be issued to him. He lastly contended that since the petitioner has worked against the non-existing posting after Kashmir Singh had gone to RTI, Jogindernagar along with post. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully. 2. The petitioner was promoted as a Senior Scale Stenographer only on temporary basis as is evident from office order Annexure A-2. It is clearly stipulated in office order dated 31.8.2000 that he was liable to be reverted on the return of Sh. Kashmir Singh, regular Senior Scale Stenographer to his parent department. Sh. Kashmir Singh was relieved from his duties on 31.5.2001 by the Secretary, Himachal Pradesh Subordinate Staff Selection Board where he was posted on deputation basis. The post of Senior Scale Stenographer was permanently transferred to RTI and thereafter it stood abolished in the Department of Consolidation of Holdings. It is in these circumstances the petitioner was reverted vide Annexure A-4. He has no vested right to continue to discharge the duties of higher post after joining back by Sh. Kashmir Singh. He was also apprised that in the eventuality of Sh. Kashmir Singh being repatriated to parent department, he would be reverted. It is in these circumstances the petitioner was reverted vide Annexure A-4. He has no vested right to continue to discharge the duties of higher post after joining back by Sh. Kashmir Singh. He was also apprised that in the eventuality of Sh. Kashmir Singh being repatriated to parent department, he would be reverted. The reversion of the petitioner is in accordance with law and as per the terms and conditions contained in Annexure A-2. Since the petitioner was promoted purely on temporary basis, no notice was required to be issued to him. The plea of Sh. Ramakant Sharma that the recoveries could not be effected from the salary of the petitioner cannot be accepted. He has worked against the post which stood abolished after the same was transferred to RTI. A person cannot discharge the duties legally against the non-existence post. In these circumstances, the decision of the respondents to effect the recoveries of excess amount from the petitioner with effect from 1.6.2001 cannot be faulted with. 3. Accordingly, in view of the aforesaid reasoning, there is no merit in the petition and the same is dismissed. No costs.