SHRI. K.N. RAO Vs. UOI & ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NO one is present on behalf of the petitioner though as per record, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri B.K. Paul has been served.

(2.) THE petitioner has challenged the order dated 5th November, 1988 whereby he was removed from service on the ground that he overstayed his leave with effect from 2nd May, 1988. The petitioner's case is that he was granted leave from 19th April, 1988 to 1st May, 1988 but he could not resume his duty on expiry of the leave due to chronic depression and he sent the intimation of his illness on telephone to the concerned officers. The petitioner claims to have reported for duty in June, 1997 but was not permitted to join. The petitioner submitted an appeal dated 2nd July, 1997 which was rejected on 2nd July, 1998 as time barred.

(3.) IN the facts and circumstances of this case, there are no grounds to interfere with the decision of the respondents as the petitioner has failed to make out any illegality, irregularity, perversity or any jurisdictional error to warrant any interference by this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However, since no one is present on behalf of the petitioner, this Court is left with no option but to dismiss the writ petition in default of appearance of the petitioner and his counsel.