RAJWANT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is plaintiff's second appeal challenging the judgment of the Lower Appellate Court whereby appeal filed by the defendants -respondents was accepted and judgment and decree of the trial Court was set aside which resulted into dismissal of the suit filed by the plaintiff -respondent.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the plaintiff -appellant was recruited as Constable with the respondent -Department on 29.03.1991 and was posted at Police Post Sukhe De Behak, Kapur -thala in September 1992. It is the case of the plaintiff that on 07.09.1992 he suddenly fell ill. Since there was no provision for medical treatment at the police post, he remained under the treatment of one Dr. Kamal Kumar Sidhu, MBBS of Old Jawahar Nagar, Jalandhar during the period 07.09.1992 to 24.10.1992. The doctor advised him complete bed rest during this period. He reported back for duty on 24.10.1992. Unfortunately, there was a relapse and the plaintiff was again taken ill on 26.10.1992. The plaintiff claimed that during the period 26.10.1992 to 14.03.1993 he was completely bedridden. Since he became fit, he reported back for duty. He gave intimation regarding his illness to the concerned authority and also sent application for grant of leave. However, orders passed on his leave application were never conveyed to him.

(3.) THE plaintiff claimed that the orders of the authorities dismissing him from service and treating the period of 196 days of his alleged absence as non -duty period and without pay were illegal, void and against the provisions of law and therefore were not binding on the plaintiff and claimed that the same are liable to be set aside. Hence, this suit for declaration to the effect that orders passed by the SSP Kapurthala, DIG Jalandhar Range, Jalandhar Cantt and Inspector General of Police, Chandigarh, whereby the plaintiff was dismissed from service and period of 196 days of his alleged absence was treated as non -duty period are illegal and are liable to be set aside. The plaintiff claimed that he is entitled to the declaration that he be continued as Constable as before 19.08.1993 with all rights, privileges and emoluments attached to that post.