YAMUNA PRASAD RAI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Arun Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, and learned Standing Counsel. The parties have exchanged pleadings and with their consent the writ petition has been heard at the admission stage.

(2.) On 6.5.2003, following orders was passed issuing interim mandamus to the State Government to consider and decide petitioner's leave application dated 5.1.1998 along with Chief Medical Officer's fitness certificate.

(3.) "This is the fifth writ petition filed by the petitioner praying for joining and for arrears of salary. Petitioner was appointed as Junior Engineer in 1974 in Public Works Department. On 7.1.1981 he joined his duty at Azamgarh. On 8.2.1981 he fell ill, vomitted blood and suffered from dysentery. He was admitted in the Government Hospital and was subsequently shifted to Ballia. It is alleged that he sent several leave applications. On 5.1.1989, after 8 years he made an application to Executive Engineer to join along with a fitness certificate from Chief Medical 'Officer who certified that petitioner was suffering from, 'Ulcerative Colitis associated with Haemorrhoids with Anaemia'. The Executive Engineer referred the matter to Chief Engineer. In first writ petition decided on 10.5.1994, the Chief Engineer was directed to look into the matter and take appropriate decision. A contempt petition was filed and after bailable warrants an order was passed on 26.4.1995 rejecting his application. In second writ petition, on 26.4.1995, the order was quashed on the ground that no reasons have been given. The third writ petition was disposed of on 28.5.1998 to comply with the order passed in the second writ petition. This time the Engineer-in-Chief by his order dated 2.12.1998 rejected the application on the ground of his absence from duty on account of which his services stood automatically terminated after 5 years under the Fundamental Rule 18 Financial Band Book, Volume 2, Part II to IV. The fourth writ petition was filed on 19.1.2001. The Court found, that Fundamental Rule 18 has been amended in 1989 with the result that leave for more than 5 years can only be sanctioned by the State, Government; and that the absence for more than 5 years attracts for disciplinary action. The writ petition was allowed quashing the order dated 2,12.1998 and leaving it open to the respondents to initiate disciplinary action.