BISHAN LAL DHAKAD Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the matter was taken up for final adjudication at this stage.

(2.) Aggrieved of the impugned order dated 6th October, 2005, terminating the service of the petitioner, the writ proceedings have been instituted claiming relief under the prayer clause, which reads thus:-

(3.) The skeletal material facts, indispensable for appreciation of the controversy raised in the instant writ application needs to be first noticed. On 23rd April, 1985, the petitioner was appointed on the post of Lab Technician at Primary Medical & Health Centre, Lalsot, Rajasthan. It is pleaded case of the petitioner that in addition to Primary Health Centre at Lalsot; he also worked at Primary Health Centre, Bandlesahare, Bharatpur, in the office of Chief Medical & Health Officer, Bhilwara, Chief Medical & Health Officer, Karoli, Primary Health Centre Media, Karoli etc. while in service. However, by order dated 5th November, 1996, the petitioner was transferred from Todabheem to Primary Health Centre, Karanpur (Sawai Madhopur), against the vacant post of 'Lab Technician' in administrative exigencies cancelling the order dated 9/14th October, 1996, by which he was relieved to join in the office of the Joint Director, Medical & Health Services (Zone), Kota. Be that as it may, the petitioner did not join at the transferred station for reason best known to him, and therefore, was called upon vide order dated 5th February, 1997 (Annexure-3), to immediately report for duty, with reference to letter/communication dated 24th January, 1997, clearly indicating to him of his negligence and willful absence, for not joining the duties at the station of posting. In response, the petitioner submitted his joining report on 6th February, 1997. Vide order dated 7th February, 1997, the petitioner was directed to report for duty at Primary Health Centre, Karanpur, in compliance of the order dated 5th November, 1996, since there was no vacant post available at Primary Health Centre, Mandrayal (Sawai Madhopur). The petitioner addressed a communication to the Chief Medical & Health Officer, Karoli/Sawai Madhopur on 12th February, 1997, to post him at a place other than Karanpur, as he apprehended eminent danger to his life and lives of his family members on account of enmity. The representation was followed by reminder dated 28th April, 1997, 28th December, 1997, 30th December, 1997 and 10th January, 2001, and thereafter, there was a complete silence for over five years until the petitioner was called upon to show cause, vide notice dated 30th August, 2005, for his willful absence for almost eight years with effect from 7th February, 1997. It was further detailed out in the notice that the petitioner was accorded an opportunity of personal hearing on 20th July, 2005, in response to his representation dated 6th June, 2005, but the petitioner did not furnish any satisfactory explanation for his long absence from duty. Therefore, invoking the provisions of Rule 86(4) of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules of 1951', for short), the petitioner was called upon to submit his reply within fifteen days, failing which the irresistible inference would be that the petitioner had nothing to say in this regard and decision will be taken in accordance with law at his costs and consequences. The notice was responded by the petitioner through a representation dated 12th September, 2005, and he was also accorded personal hearing, but the petitioner could not furnish any tenable reason or evidence justifying his long absence from duty for eight years. The competent authority was not satisfied with the reply of the petitioner as aforesaid and treated his absence as voluntary resignation from service invoking the power contained under the mandate of Rule 86(4) of the Rules of 1951.