SHEO NARAYAN DAS Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition has been preferred by the petitioner for getting salary for his absenteeism period running from 1st May, 2009 to 20th January, 2001.

(2.) IT is alleged by learned counsel for the petitioner that initially, the petitioner was working on the post "X  and, thereafter, he was transferred to the post "Y , but, he had not joined the post "Y  on the ground of sickness, which continued for much longer period, as stated hereinabove. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon some recommendation for payment of salary, made by the high ranking police officer for the aforesaid period, which is at Annexure3 to the memo of the petition and, therefore, it is submitted that on the basis of Annexure3, salary has to be paid to the petitioner.

(3.) HAVING heard learned counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I see no reason to entertain this writ petition mainly for the following facts and reasons: