HIRDAYA LAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -The petitioner was working as a permanent Gangman in the Nagar Mahapalika, Gorakhpur (hereinafter referred to as 'Nagar Mahapalika') since 1981. He remained unauthorisedly absent from 1.7.1990 to 11.10.1993. However, he came to the Department on 11.10.1993 and submitted the medical certificate as well as the fitness certificate and sought permission to join the post. The copy of the 'Note' which has been annexed as Annexure-2 to the petition indicates that certain recommendations were made by the office to the Administrator of Nagar Mahapalika for permitting the petitioner to join but no orders were communicated to the petitioner as a result of which the present petition was filed on 5.9.1994, for a direction upon the respondents to permit the petitioner to join and pay his monthly salary as well as the arrears of salary.

(2.) A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. It has been mentioned that the petitioner unauthorisedly remained absent from 1.7.1990 to 11.10.1993 but no order has been brought on record to show what action was taken by the Nagar Mahapalika in respect of the services of the petitioner. A bald statement has been made in paragraph '11' of the petition that the petitioner had been removed from service and in his place a person had been employed but the copy of any such order removing the petitioner from the services of Nagar Mahapalika or appointment of any other person has not been filed alongwith the counter-affidavit.

(3.) I have carefully considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties.