MANOJ KUMAR Vs. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition is directed against the order dated 22.11.2011 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench (hereinafter referred to the Tribunal ) whereby OA 353/11 filed by the petitioner, was dismissed. The facts giving rise to the filing of this writ petition can be summarized as under:-

(2.) The petitioner received the charge sheet and submitted a reply dated 30.07.2008 claiming that his absence was neither deliberate nor intentional and was purely on account of circumstances beyond his control, he being unwell during this period. The petitioner, however, did not participate in the inquiry despite repeated notices and the inquiry was accordingly held ex-parte. The Inquiry Officer, vide his report dated 05.02.2009 found the charges against the petitioner to be proved. The Disciplinary Authority vide order dated 11.05.2009, imposed penalty of removal from service upon the petitioner, which was ordinarily not be a disqualification for future employment under the Government. The period of absence was treated as unauthorized, without any pay. The appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the Appellate Authority vide order dated 26.08.2010. Being aggrieved by the orders passed by the Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority, the petitioner filed the OA which came to be dismissed by the Tribunal by virtue of the impugned order.

(3.) During the course of arguments, the first contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner was that since the petitioner was suffering from various ailments during the period of absence, he was not in a position to attend the duty and, therefore, his absence cannot be said to be deliberate and intentional. Admittedly, the petitioner was governed by CCS (Leave) Rules.