VIRENDRA SINGH Vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR UPSRTC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present writ petition is directed against the order dated 8.9.1988 whereby the petitioner was removed from service and the appellate order dated 29.6.1990 rejecting the appeal preferred by the petitioner.

(2.) THE petitioner contended in the present writ petition, inter alia, that he was appointed as driver under the respondents-corporation in the year 1981 and was confirmed in year 1983 and all along the petitioner was discharging his duties without any complaint. In the year 1987 the petitioner was suspended by order dated 19.12.1987 and was served with a charge-sheet of the same date. Charges against the petitioner are that he was absent from duties without any prior notice and joined his duties thereafter with the medical certificate. THE petitioner submitted his reply on 10.2.1988 contending inter alia that whenever the petitioner was on leave he applied for leave and the same was well sanctioned according to the Rules and with regard to the period alleged in the charge-sheet he stated that the petitioner was absent from duty and joined his duties on 7.11.1987 and worked smoothly till 17.11.1987 and on 18th and 19th November, 87 he was absent as those were the rest days. For his absence on medical ground he duly produced medical certificate for the period between 20.11.1987 and 20.1.1988 issued by Dr. R.C. Gupta, Medical Officer, Kher Garh Government Hospital, Agra. Enquiry report was submitted and petitioner was served with a show cause notice dated 30.5.1988 to which the petitioner submitted his reply on 11.7.1988 and ultimately by order dated 8.9.1988 the petitioner was removed from service. THE petitioner preferred an appeal which was rejected by the appellate authority by order dated 29.6.1990.

(3.) UPON hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the material on record it is apparent from the charge-sheet, at Annexure No. 2 to the writ petition and the enquiry report at Annexure No. 4 to the writ petition that the only allegation against the petitioner was that he was absent from duty without any prior intimation and he joined duties producing medical certificate. The only finding of the enquiry officer is that the petitioner was absent without any prior intimation and after he joined he produced medical certificate. Neither the genuineness of the medical certificate nor the factum of ailment has been disbelieved by the enquiry officer for remaining absent from duty without any prior intimation.