LAWS(ALL)-2012-2-172

MOHD NAFEES Vs. STATE OF U P

Decided On February 22, 2012
MOHD. NAFEES Appellant
V/S
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question which calls for consideration in this writ petition is as to whether remaining absent for more than 45 days for whatever reason would tantamount automatic dismissal from service or whether appointing authority is empowered to go into the question as to whether the petitioner had sufficient cause to remain absent for the said period. The controversy involved in this writ petition is confined to the issue that the petitioner who was undergoing training had remained absent from duty for more than 45 days as a result of which recommendation was made to the appointing authority for terminating his service by invoking instruction No. 15-D of the general instructions of PAC Constable training manual.

(2.) The case set out by the petitioner is that he was undergoing training in 2006 after his selection as constable in the police department. The post appointment training was for a period of seven months. It appears that the petitioner remained absent from duty from 24.1.2007 to 3.4.2007. He remained absent for 70 days, beyond the period of 45 days as provided under the instruction No. 15-D of the Manual. For having remained absent for more than 45 days, a recommendation was made to the appointing authority in terms of the aforementioned instructions seeking the termination of petitioner's service. The recommendation was accepted and an order of termination was passed on 5.8.2007 on account of petitioner's failure to complete the training after his appointment. This order is subject-matter of challenge.

(3.) While scanning through the instruction No. 15-D, it clearly appears that for having remained absent for more than 45 days for whatever reason, a trainee is required to be terminated by the appointing authority on recommendation being made by the concerned officer. It is an admitted case of the parties that the petitioner suffered an accident on account of which he sustained fracture in right leg as result of which he remained confined to bed and could not resume his duties. This is the reason for his being absent from duty.