T S KAUSHAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (D/- 2-3-1964)During the course of arguments, Shri. Kaushal, learned counsel for the petitioner, has drawn my attention to two documents produced by him (see pages 79 and 147 of the paper-book) in which he has given a list of 18 doctors whose resignations were accepted by the authorities between 25-1-1963 and 16-8-1963. He has submitted that this acceptance of resignations is inconsistent with the contention put forth by the respondents, that there is a shortage of doctors in Government service and that this is why the petitioners case is being treated as an example for those who are inclined to shirk duty in public services. Shri Pannu has in reply stated at the bar that these are cases of doctors most of whom were going to offer their services in joint defence but in the return or in the supplementary affidavit, there is no mention of this plea. n the circumstances, it is desirable that the respondents furnish full information about these doctors, supported by an affidavit. Adjourned to 6-3-1964.

(2.) (D/- 25-3-1964) This order may be read in continuation of my order dated 2nd of March, 1964. Dr. T. S. Kaushal has filed this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution. He joined the service of the Punjab Government on 16th July, 1958 as an Assistant Surgeon (Non-gazetted) in Rural Dispensary, Sohangarh, Dist. Ferozepore. On 6th February, 1960, he was transferred to Rural Health Centre, Bhadson, District Patiala in Punjab Civil Medical Services (P. C. M. S.) Class II. His appointment was purely temporary and his services could be terminated on one months notice by either side. On 23rd May, 1963, he was posted at Primary Health Unit, Mullana, District Ambala, where he performed his duties satisfactorily, there being no complaint against him whatsoever. His last pay for April, 1963 was raised to Rs. 595 P. M. On 24th January, 1963, his mother died on account of cancer, having been ill for about a year and a half. His wife had also suffered in health on account of having been busy in nursing her mother-in-law. The petitioner ion view of his wife ill-health on 27th April, 1963, applied for his transfer to other Employees State in surance Dispensary, Sonepat, because he wanted to avail of better treatment facilities by taking his wife to Delhi as and when necessary. On 30th April, 1963 he came to Chandigarh and learnt that he was being transferred to Lahaul-Spiti, a far flung non-family station. He thereupon submitted another application to the Director of Health Service, Punjab, and also forwarded copies thereof to the Chief Minister and the Health Minister, Punjab, stating the circumstances requiring his presence at a station where he could attend to his wife. His father aged 70 years also required the petitioner attention. He was however, informed by the Director of Health Services that his transfer to Lahaul Spiti could not be cancelled. Finding it difficult to persuade the authorities concerned to agree with the petitioners point of view, he submitted his resignation on 22nd May, 1963, with a cheque for Rs. 595 to cover one months salary in lieu of notice. The authorities instead of taking a humane and favourable view adopted stiff attitude and started forcing the petitioner to join his duties in district Lahaul and Spiti. They also threatened to prosecute him under S. 5 (b) of East Punjab Essential Service (Maintenance) Act, 1947 and S. 142 (A) of Defence of India Rules, 1962. The petitioner again requested the respondents to accept his resignation, but without any fruitful results. On 3rd August, 1963 the petitioner met the Director of Health Services explaining to him personally the circumstances in which the petitioner was placed on account of the illness of his wife and his ailing father. This was followed by further representation, but having failed in his efforts to persuade the authorities concerned to consider his case more sympathetically he has come to this Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution.

(3.) IN the return it has been stressed that the petitioner absented himself from duty at Mullana on 1st May, 1963 without permission after leaving the application for one weeks arned leave. This was stated to be necessary on account of alleged illness of his wife. This leave was not granted. He, however, applied for one more weeks leave from 8th June, 1963; he had not applied for any leave between 15th May, 1963 and 14th June, 1963. There was another application dated 7th August, 1963, for leave from 10th August followed obey still another application for 15 days leave from 25th August, 1963. No leave was sanctioned to the petitioner, but he remained absent from duty from 1st May, 1963 onwards without complying with the orders of his transfer. The submission of a resignation by the petitioner, been admitted; but it has been stressed that the petitioner never gave one months notice to quit service. The petitioners application for leave, it is emphasised clearly shows that he continued to treat himself as if in service. It has finally been pleaded that the petitioner on learning about his transfer to Lahaul and Spiti in public interest declined deliberately to comply with the orders on one pretext or the other and absented himself without leave. The petitioner, it is averred, could not claim any leave as of right and his leave applications were also not on the prescribed forms.