R C MIGLANI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has invoked writ jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking writ of mandamus directing respondents No.3 and 4 to pay the arrears of of salary and other amount due to the petitioner along with 12% compound interest. Petitioner has also challenged the orders dated 4.12.1987 (Annexure P-1) and 10.02.1987 (Annexure P-2) passed by respondent Nos.1 and 2 respectively.

(2.) Brief facts of the present case are that the petitioner was appointed as a Lecturer in English at Hindu College, Sonepatrespondent College in the year 1965; in the year 1985, the petitioner after obtaining station leave proceeded to his home town at Panipat, however, he fell ill there and applied for medical leave telegraphically; leave was rejected by the respondent No.4, however, on getting well, the petitioner resumed his duties and submitted his medical illness/fitness certificate; respondent No.4 rejected the medical fitness certificate submitted by the petitioner on the ground that the said certificate has not been issued by the CMO, Sonepat, as such medical leave could not be granted to the petitioner; respondent No.4 issued letter dated 27.2.1986 (Annexure P-3) to the petitioner, intimating the petitioner that on the basis of the findings of an inquiry held against the petitioner, the Governing Body, respondent No.3 had formed an opinion to dismiss the petitioner with immediate effect; proposal to dismiss the petitioner was forwarded to Director, Higher Education-respondent No.2, for granting approval under the provisions of the Haryana Affiliated Colleges (Security of Service) Act, 1979 (for brevity the Act); petitioner made a representation to respondent No.4 vide his letters dated 3.3.1986/22.3.1986; respondent No.2- Director, Higher Education did not accept the proposal of dismissal of the petitioner from service on the ground that penalty of dismissal from service is too severe, however, directed to impose penalty of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect vide order dated 10.2.1987 (Annexure P-2); petitioner preferred a revision petition before respondent No.1 vide his letter dated 17.3.1987; Management Committee of the College also preferred revision petition against the non-acceptance of the proposal and modifying the penalty of dismissal into stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect; respondent No.1 after hearing both the parties, passed order dated 4.12.1987 (Annexure P-1) enhancing the penalty from stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect to stoppage of four increments with cumulative effect; however, despite of order passed by the respondent No.1 dated 4.12.1987 imposing penalty of four increments with cumulative effect, no order of penalty was passed by the respondent No.3 and respondent No.4 as required under Rule 7 of the Rules, hence, petitioner is entitled for arrears of salary and other amount due to the petitioner along with 12% compound interest.

(3.) Respondents have contested the writ petition by way of filing their written statement.