LALOO YADAV Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by the order of termination from service by the Respondent-Navodya Vidyalaya Samiti invoking Clause 2 of the appointment letter, the Petitioner had filed application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi. The said O.A. has been dismissed vide impugned judgment dated 14th November, 2000 and this Writ Petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India wherein the said judgment is assailed.

(2.) DURING the pendency of this Writ Petition, Petitioner had passed away and his LRs were brought on record. Further, at the time of arguments in the case, nobody appeared on behalf of any of the parties.

(3.) INITIAL posting of the Petitioner was at Leh Laddakh. He was thereafter transferred to Poonch and then to Sangroor in Punjab. On 24.08.1997 the Petitioner joined at Sangroor, Punjab. The Petitioner had applied for Casual Leave for 5 days from 13.03.1998 to 17.03.1998 on the ground that his mother in his hometown in Ajamgarh, UP was sick and he had to attend to her. He, however, did not return after the expiry of the said leave and kept on sending the application for extension of the leave from time to time. The application for extension for leave was, however, rejected and he was specifically asked to join the duties. Various notices were sent in this behalf from time to time but the Petitioner did not join back the duties. Ultimately, order dated 11.02.1999 was passed invoking Clause 2 of the appointment letter and the petitioner was terminated. This order was challenged by the Petitioner before the Tribunal and the said O.A. had been dismissed vide order dated 14.11.2000 as already stated.