PUSHPA BHARDWAJ Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing orders/letters, Annexures P-6, P-13 and P-15. Briefly stated, the facts necessary for adjudication of the present petition as narrated therein are that the petitioner was appointed as A.N.M. by respondent No. 2 and she joined as such on 6.10.1981. She rendered service upto 23.9.1984 and had taken leave from 24.9.1984 to 24.2.1985 and went abroad after prior sanction of the leave as her husband had gone abroad. The petitioner vide application dated 11.2.1985 (Annexure P-3) requested for extension of leave upto 31.12.1985. The petitioner joined her duties vide joining report dated 9.2.1987 (Annexure P-5). However, her services were terminated vide order dated 18.2.1987 (Annexure P-6). The petitioner filled up the bond to serve the department and after termination of her services, a letter dated 2.7.1982 (Annexure P-7) was issued to the surety to deposit the surety amount i.e. Rs. 1247/-. Thereafter, the petitioner sent a representation dated 22.12.1987 (Annexure P-8) to respondent No. 2 to take her back in service. On 10.2.1988, respondent No. 2 again sent a letter (Annexure P-9) to the surety to deposit the amount of Rs. 1247/-. The petitioner vide representation (Annexure P-10) approached the Health Minister upon which the Joint Secretary, Health Department was called. The Health Minister vide order dated 22.2.1991 (Annexure P-12) directed the department to take the petitioner back in service. Instead of taking the petitioner back in service, respondent No. 2 rejected her representation vide order dated 29.11.1991 (Annexure P-13). Thereafter, the petitioner filed representation dated 7.3.1992 (Annexure P-14). However, she was informed in the month of May, 1992 that her representation has been rejected vide letter (Annexure P-15). Hence, the present writ petition.

(2.) Upon notice of motion having been issued, the respondents filed written statement controverting the averments made in the writ petition. It was pleaded that initially, the petitioner was appointed on ad hoc basis w.e.f. 25.9.1981 and she went on leave without pay. Thereafter her leave was not sanctioned by the Government and she was directed to join duty vide letter dated 27.1.1986 (Annexure R-1). She did not join her duties and her services were terminated vide order dated 10.2.1987 (Annexure P-5). The prayer for dismissal of the writ petition was made.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that vide Annexure P-12, the Health Minister had recommended that the petitioner be taken back in service and in between period be treated as leave of the kind due. It was urged that Annexures R-1 and R-2 issued by the Chief Medical Officer, Sonepat to the petitioner regarding her absence from duty were sent at the wrong address and were never received by the petitioner. It was contended that since no enquiry was held before terminating the services of the petitioner, the same was unsustainable in view of judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Om Parkash Goel v. Himachal Pradesh Tourism Development Corporation Ltd., Shimla and another, 1991 SCC(L&S) 911 ; Jarnail Singh and others v. State of Punjab and others, 1986 AIR(SC) 1626 and this Court in Baljit Singh v. The State of Haryana and another,1989 2 SLR 135.