RAJ KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was working as a Warden in the Central Jail, Jabalpur. As he remained unauthorizedly absent on certain spells, a paper publication was made vide Annexure R-2 which stipulated that if the petitioner did not join the duties as on 11.6.2001 it would be presumed that the petitioner had abandoned the services. After such paper publication, as the petitioner did not join his services due to his domestic and health problems he was visited with the punishment of termination as contained in Annexure A-2 dated 20.6.2001.

(2.) ASSAILING the aforesaid order it is submitted by Mr. Ramesh Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner that no inquiry was held with regard to factum of unauthorized absence and hence, an order of dismissal could not have passed as has been done vide AnnxureA-2. Per contra, Mr. S.M. Lai, learned counsel appearing for the State has submitted that the petitioner was a chronic absentee and did not join despite notices and, therefore, there was no other option but to pass the order of termination.

(3.) IN view of the aforesaid, the order passed vide Annexure A-2 stands quashed. The petitioner shall be reinstated within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the order passed today. However, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, he shall not be entitled to any backwages. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly without any order as to costs. C.C. as rules.