NGURZAKHUMA Vs. STATE OF MIZORAM AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition by one Ngurzakhuma who was appointed admittedly on October 4, 1972 temporarily as Soil Conservation Demonstrator vide Order No. ESSTT -2/72/2544 dated October 4, 1972 and posted at Buarpui after serving for sometime at Haulawng.

(2.) THE petitioner contended, inter alia, that his pay and allowances were withheld since 1976 on the plea of Government that he did not join his place posting at Barapansury pursuant to the transfer order. That in fact no transfer order was served on him. On making inquiry he found in 1977 that a transfer order was lying in file without service on him. He wanted to join thereafter to the new posting but was not allowed to do so. That the Respondent No. 3 (Director, Soil and Water Conservation Department, Government of Mizoram) to his surprise issued articles of charges vide his Memo No. DS -/79/10797 - 8 dated November 14, 1979 regarding non -joining of duty at place of posting. Petitioner submitted in defence that he was not served with any order of transfer. Thereafter a departmental inquiry was conducted by Divisional Soil Conservation Officer, Sri M.N. Omar and he co -operated with the enquiry. The witnesses were summoned more than once by the Inquiring Officer but none appeared. Petitioner was summoned to appear before Inquiring Officer and he did appear accordingly on October 12, 1981 and nothing more than his appearance happened. In 1984 petitioner was again summoned to appear before the Inquiring Officer. He did but no witness turned up this time also. Presenting Officer stated to have made a spot verification and submitted report stating the defence statement vide Articles 1, 2, 3 and 4 were true. In spite of best effort from his side nothing came out and neither the inquiry was completed nor his pay and allowance were released. Department did not put him under suspension also. That he was informed by Respondents Nos. 4 and 3 that he (petitioner) has drawn his pay and allowance upto December, 1976 and no inquiry report was traceable and this he came to know vide LSC -5/92 -93/712 dated January 20, 1993 addressed to him. That the petitioner being aggrieved by non -payment of his salary in absence of either suspension or termination or removal order from service had no other alternative but to file writ petition which was numbered as Civil Rule 18/96 praying amongst others his reinstatement in service and releasing all his benefits due from the employer including seniority promotion etc. That on service of notice of civil rule the Respondent No. 3 issued threatening letter vide his memo No. C. 18014/96 -DTE (S & WC) dated June 27, 1996.

(3.) THE writ petition CR. 18/96 was disposed of with directions to Respondents to dispose his appeal. That the respondents were lacking the sincerity and honesty to deal with the case of the petitioner. That petitioner is entitled to all service benefits including arrears of back -wages, seniority, promotion fixation of pay and allowances from January 1977 till date, That the impugned order dated September 24, 1998 of the Chief Secretary removing from service was void and illegal and liable to be set aside.