TAPAN MAJUMDER Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Sr. counsel Mr. A.K. Bhowmik assisted by learned counsel Mr. R.C. Debnath for the petitioner and learned Addl. G.A. Mrs. A.S. Lodh for the respondents.

(2.) FACTS , in short, necessary for disposal of this writ petition are that the petitioner was appointed as a Postgraduate teacher on 28.04.1988 and while he was posted at Srinagar Higher Secondary School he went unauthorisedly absent from duty on different spell and for the period of absence from 05.11.1993 to 06.03.1995 (487 days) and 14.03.1995 to 28.12.1995 (290 days), the respondent No. 2 by Memo dated 10.08.1998 (Annexure -1 to the writ petition) declared the period of absence as "dies -non" for all purposes i.e. increment, leave, pension, etc. but the period of service prior to the period of "dies -non" was not forfeited.

(3.) LEARNED Addl. G.A. Mrs. Lodh has fairly submitted that reasons has been clearly assigned in Memo dated 21.01.1999 (Annexure -3 to the writ petition) issued by the respondent No. 2 but it is an admitted position that the said Memorandum has been set aside by the Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court in the writ appeal mentioned above. It is an admitted position that in the impugned Memo dated 28.08.2008, the respondent No. 2 has assigned no reason at all while arriving at a decision of passing the order of 'Dies -Non'. The disciplinary authority may take any decision according to its wisdom judiciously but it must be supported by reason and any cryptic order which is not supported by any reason is liable to be interfered by Court in exercise of the power of judicial review.