STATE OF HARYANA Vs. ANANT RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The application is for fixing an actual date of hearing.

(2.) Mr. Ravi Partap Singh AAG., Haryana submits that the aforementioned judgment and decree was assailed by filing appeal under Sec. 96 CPC and the first appellate court being court of fact and law partly accepted the appeal and the orders dated 9.9.1992 and 19.1.1993 were modified and it was held that the respondent -plaintiff shall be entitled to retiral benefits from 9.9.92 and shall be paid the same within a period of three months.

(3.) He further submits that the respondent -plaintiff had remained absent for seven months without seeking sanction from the competent authority and in view of the absence, he was served with the charge sheet and the reply to charge sheet was not found to be satisfactory accordingly the enquiry officer was appointed. The enquiry officer, after taking evidence, recommended for dismissal of service and vide order dated 9.9.1992 the respondent -plaintiff was dismissed from service.