HOSHIAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is the plaintiff-appellant's appeal. His suit for declaration to the effect that the order dated Jan. 24, 1984 terminating his services was null and void having been dismissed by the trial Court and the appeal having met the same fate, he has come up in this second appeal. A facts may be noticed.

(2.) The appellant was appointed as a mechanic in the Field Mechanical Division. Thein Dam Project on work-charge basis w.e.f. Aug. 26, 1980. On June 1, 1983, the workers including the appellant went on strike. The strike continued upto Aug. 18, 1983. The appellant claims that he reported for duty on Aug. 19.1983, but was not allowed to join. It is further claimed that he sent a letter dated Oct. 25, 1983 (Ex. P.1) to the Superintendent Engineer, which was received and acknowledged by him vide Ex. P.2. In spite of that, his services have been terminated. On these facts, it has been claimed that the order of termination is void ab initio.

(3.) The claim as made by the appellant was controverted by the defendants-respondents. It was inter alia asserted that various workers had not reported for duty after the strike had finished. Accordingly a notice was given in nine newspapers on Sept. 22, 1983 calling upon the absenting workers including the appellant to join service. Since he did not come for duty even after the strike had finished, the Superintending Engineer issued a registered notice to the plaintiff-appellant to resume duty vide letter dated Sept. 30, 1983. This was followed by a second registered notice vide letter dated Oct. 12, 1983. When the appellant still did not report for duty, a registered letter dated Jan. 24, 1984 was sent to him by which he was informed of his having abandoned his service.