PRITAM LAL SHARMA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THROUGH the medium of this petition the petitioner wants reinstatement on the post of Chowkidar/Orderly in the Labour welfare Centre J&K Chandigarh and to release his pay dues with effect from March 1988. The petitioner has also prayed for a declaration to the effect that the order terminating his services is illegal.

(2.) THE brief facts leading to the filing of the present petition are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Chowkidar in the office of Assistant Labour Commissioner J&K Government Chandigarh on adhoc basis but vide order dt. 15.3.1988 was appointed as chowkidar in the pay scale of Rs 345 -460 plus usual allowances to such employeer of the J&K Government. The petitioners case is that after he joined on the post of chowkidar pursuant to the aforesaid Government Order dt. 15.3.85 he kept on performing his duties up till 13.3.1988 when he had suddenly to leave for his home because of his mothers sickness. The petitioner has submitted that on reaching home his mother expired and thereafter he himself became unwell with the result that he could not join his duties for a long time. The petitioner has also shown lack of awareness about any order terminating his services but has stated that he applied for reinstatement vide his representation dated 2.3.1989 which representation has not been accepted by the respondents.

(3.) THE respondents have controverted the allegations of the petitioner about the question of termination of his services. In the counter affidavit of Mohd Khalil, Labour Commissioner of J&K Government, filed on behalf of the respondents, it has been admitted that the petitioner was appointed as a chowkidar at Labour welfare Centre Chandigarh vide order dt. 15.3.1985. It has further been stated in the said counter - affidavit that the petitioner deserted his place of posting and from 14.3.1988 did not attend his duties after being present on 11.3.1988, 12th and 13th of March 1988 being gazetted holidays. On enquiries being made from his place of residence at Chandigarh it was discovered that the petitioner had vacated the premises and left the place along with all his belongings and that before vacating the premises he -had told his landlord that he was leaving Chandigarh for good. In view of his absence from duty, a registered letter dt. 16.3.1988 was sent to him at his home address and another letter of the same date was sent to his father at his native place, informing him about the petitioners desertion from duty. The respondents have filed copies of both these letters along with their counter, on 28.3.1988 the petitioner came to the office of the Assistant Labour Commissioner at Chandigarh and communicated in writing his unwillingness and inability to continue in service. According to the respondents the petitioner was repeatedly persuaded to re -consider his decision that he remained adamant. On 8.4.1988, the petitioner was intimated vide a registered letter of same date sent at his home address, that in case nothing was heard from him up to 30.4.1988 his letter dated 28.3.1988 would be treated as his resignation and his dues for the period he was on duty in March 1988 amounting to Rs. 20.21 would be remitted to him. Since nothing was heard from the petitioner till 30.4.88 his resignation tendered on 28.3.1988 was accepted on 2.5.1988 and the petitioner was informed accordingly. On 3.7.1989 the petitioner submitted two applications, one dated 2.7.1989 Sunday) vide which he submitted a Photostat copy of the High Court under dt. 27.6.1989, and another application dt. 47.1989 requesting for leave with effect from 4.7.1989. Subsequently a telegram was received from him requesting for extension of leave and another application dated 19.7.1989 was also received wherein also extension of leave was prayed for.