BHIM SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Regular Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree of the first Appellate Court affirming on appeal those of the trial judge, whereby, the suit of the plaintiff for a declaration that the order as conveyed to him by Sub Divisional Officer (C), Hissar vide Endorsement No. 1957-58/ SDHR, dated February 24, 1969 was void, was dismissed.

(2.) THE facts:the appellant (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff) who was employed as a Patwari in the revenue department, retired from service on August 4, 1967 on attaining the age of superannuation. He was informed by Sub Divisional Officer (C), Hissar vide Endorsement No. 1957-58/sdhr, dated February 24, 1969 that since he had wilfully remained absent from duty from July 20, 1960 to January 4 1961 for more then six months, this period will be deemed to be break in service and he was not entitled to pension. The order was challenged in the civil suit on the ground that he was transferred from the consolidation department to Panniwala Mota circle on July 16, 1960 He was not allowed to join duty at his new place of posting. He was charge-sheeted and, after enquiry a warning was administered to him for remaining absent without leave The subsequent order by which the period during which he remained absent was treated as a break in service was without any notice to him. The respondent controverted the pleas made in the plaint.

(3.) FROM the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed :1. Whether the alleged break in service is bad for the reasons stated in para No. 4 of the plaint ? OPP 2. Whether the order dated 24-2-1969 is illegal, without jurisdiction and not binding upon the plaintiff ? If so to what effect ? OPP 3. Whether the suit is within limitation ? OPP