SARDARA RAM Vs. STATE OF HARYANA & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has been filed by unsuccessful plaintiff against concurrent findings of courts below, whereby the suit for declaration challenging transfer order dated 11.7.1996 and termination order dated 15.9.1998, passed during the pendency of the suit, has been rejected.

(2.) The case of the plaintiff was that he was working as a Sweeper and was transferred to the hospital of defendant/respondent No.2, vide order dated 11.7.1996. The allegations in the plaint were that the employees of the hospital of the category of the plaintiff get 5% extra House Rent Allowance, whereas the plaintiff was not being paid the extra House Rent Allowance while working in the hospital. Rather, deduction of 10% shall be made from the salary of the plaintiff and, therefore, the service conditions of the plaintiff had been changed unilaterally. It was also alleged that the services of the plaintiff were not transferable to the Pt. B.D. Sharma, PGIMS Hospital, Rohtak as he was an employee of the Pt. B.D. Sharma, PGIMS College, Rohtak. The two institutions are separate, their cadres are separate and, therefore, their service conditions and emoluments are different.

(3.) The suit was resisted on the ground of maintainability with the plea that the Institute and the College were inter-se attached and the hospital was part of the College. They had a common Director, who was also Head of the Department. There were no separate cadres and all the employees were employees of the PGIMS, Rohtak. They were governed by same service rules and there was one consolidated unit/department. It was further stated that any employee could be transferred from the College to the Hospital or vice versa and there was no question of violation of any service rules. The Director was competent to transfer any employee. The plaintiff was only shifted to Indoor gallery for doing similar and same work as he was performing in the office of Medical Superintendent. The plaintiff willfully absented himself from duty with effect from 3.9.1996 till his termination from service. Accordingly, he was charge-sheeted on 13.5.1997 on the ground that he remained willfully absent from duty without any information to the authorities and had refused to join duty despite communications dated 17.10.1996 and 10.2.1997. He was creating indiscipline by refusing to join duty and was creating hurdles in patient care.