D P BHAT Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, a doctor by profession, ex -employee of respondents as Assistant professor posted in Srinagar Medical College, challenges the impugned order of his discharge from service by respondent No. 1, for his unauthorised absence within the meaning of Article 128 of Jammu and Kashmir Civil Service Regulations.

(2.) THE facts of the petitioners case are that while serving as Lecturer, in Medical College, Srinagar in the discipline of Surgery, he got promoted as Assistant professor vide Government Order No. 87 -HME of 1983 dated 31 -1 -1983 in which post he joined and appears to have applied for four days causal leave vide his application dated 11 -3 -1983 with effect from 14 -3 -1983 till 18 -3 -1983 with permission to leave tae station, which leave he got duly sanctioned in his favour. The petitioner sought extension in leave by one week with permission to leave the station on 16 -3 -1983. Then again sought extension in his leave by one year of any kind due which appears to have been acknowledged by respondent No. 2 on 30 -7 -1983 vide receipt annexure B to the petition. It appears that on return before filing this petition, the petitioner came to know having been discharged from service by respondent No. 1 vide Order No. 573 -HME of 1983 dated 13 -9 -1983 impugned in this petition.

(3.) THE impugned order is pleaded violative of constitutional provisions and against the rules and contrary to facts. Under the order impugned the petitioner is said to have absented as Lecturer w.e.f 27 -12 -1982 though he appears to have been promoted subsequently as Assistant Professor in the Medical College, Srinagar, vide Govt. Order No. 87 -HME of 1983 dated 31 -1 -1983, thus, having not absented from duty in manner as alleged by respondent, on 27 -12 -1982. Further applied for casual leave on 11 -3 -1983 for four days from 14 -3 -1983 till 18 -3 -1983 which leave was properly sanctioned in his favour with permission to leave the station and having sought extension from time to time as indicated. Since the order of discharge amount to removal of a petitioner from service, the petitioner claims that it hits Article 311 of the Constitution of India for want of an inquiry least a show cause notice to him despite operation of the provisions of Article 128 C.S R. therefore, this petition for quashing the impugned order.