VINOD CHANDRA SHUKLA Vs. CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER HAMIRPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) COUNTER and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged in the case and the case is being disposed of finally at the admission stage itself.

(2.) BRIEF facts leading to this petition are that the Petitioner was appointed as a Ward Boy under the Chief Medical Officer, Hamirpur. From 14th July 1983, to 4th May, 1990 he remained absent. According to the Petitioner he had sent some leave applications which is denied by the Respondents. It appears that he remained absent without any proper leave for this period. By the order dated 21st May, 1990 the Chief Medical Officer, Hamirpur (the Appointing Authority) directed the Petitioner to take charge of the Ward Boy in Government Homeopathic Dispensary, Dariyapur Kundaura. He started working as such. According to the Petitioner as averred in para 12 of the writ petition he had obtained the salary for the period of May, 1990. This has not been specifically denied. Therefore, it is accepted that he has received the salary for this period. However, the objections were raised in the pay -bills of the Petitioner on the ground that he had been absent for more than 5 years and under Rule 18 of the Financial Handbook Volume II he had ceased to be in Government employ A letter in this regard was written by the District Magistrate, Hamirpur to the Chief Medical Officer, Hamirpur. In pursuance of the District Magistrate's letter dated 4th August, 1990 (Annexure 11) the Chief Medical Officer, Hamirpur, Respondent No. 1 wrote a letter dated 10/13th August, 1990 (Annexure 13) asserting that the matter is being sent to the Government and till the orders are received he could not be permitted to discharge his duties nor could be paid his salary.

(3.) THE stand of the state is that under the above mentioned Rule 18, if the servant is in continuous absence for more than 5 years the proper authority to make orders is the Government.