GH NABI MAGRAY Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WRIT petition has been submitted praying for quashing termination Order No. 23 -IMS -1987 dated 19.10.1987.

(2.) THE main submissions made in the petition are that the petitioner was appointed as Lecturer in Sher -i -Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences, Srinagar. Petitioner proceeded on four days casual leave on 7.5.1986 and then extended the leave by a telegram. No reply was received to convey that the leave had been sanctioned. The petitioner continued to be on leave, presuming that his leave had been sanctioned. The petitioner returned from his leave on 27 -10.1986. He was not permitted to join. Petitioner again approached the respondents on 20 -2 -1987 and the respondents did not permit him to join his duty. That when the petitioner ultimately approached respondents on 7 -7 -1991, he came to know that his service has been terminated vide Order dated 19 -10 -1987. Petitioner further submits that no notice was served on him, no enquiry was conducted before his services were terminated in an arbitrary, irrational manner in violation of principles of natural justice and the rights guaranteed by the Constitution. The petitioner, on these grounds, submits that the impugned order be quashed.

(3.) WHILE admitting that the petitioner was employed as Lecturer in Sher -i -Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences, Srinagar, the stand and submissions of respondents is that the petitioner applied for four days casual leave on 7 -5 -1986. The petitioner, on expiry of his casual leave, was to join his duties on 11 -05 -1986 but the petitioner did not resume his duties and submitted a telegram for extension of the leave. As the casual leave in favour of an employee could not be granted for more than ten days, at a stretch, the petitioner was informed under registered letter No: SKIMS/Per/514/98 -9808 dated 7 -8 -1986 that his leave has not been sanctioned and the petitioner was instructed to report on duty, failing which it was impressed that action under rules would be initiated against him. The petitioner did not join his duties and as nothing was heard from him, a charge sheet was framed against the petitioner under No: SKIMS/Per/ 514/86 -12351 dated 31.12.1986 requiring him to show cause as to why disciplinary action for unauthorised absence be not taken against him. The petitioner was required to submit his reply by 26th of January, 1987. Charge sheet was returned back undelivered with the report that the petitioner had gone to Arab. Subsequently another show cause notice was issued through publication in Government Gazette dated 21.05.1987 and as no reply was submitted by the petitioner to this notice and a no cause was shown to justify the absence, termination order was passed, taking effect from 11 -05 -1986. On these submissions it is urged that the petitioner had deliberately, wilfully and intentionally absconded, leaving no follow -up address and remained absent from duty in such a manner which would amount to abandonment of service, therefore, the order of termination is fully Justified.