SBCWP NO.1927/04. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.1927/2004. Madan Lal Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. Date of order:- January 15, 2009. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Rajendra Sharma for the petitioner. Shri Aklesh Jain, Deputy Government Counsel. **** BY THE COURT:- Petitioner has challenged the order of penalty dated 31/5/2000 by which his one annual grade increment without cumulative effect has been stopped on the allegation that when he was transferred vide order dated 27/5/1999, he did not attend duties at the place of transfer and finally joined on 17/9/1999. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that initially though the petitioner was on casual leave on 2-3 days but on 4/6/1999 he became sick and when he submitted his joining to the Deputy Director on 13/8/1999, with sickness certificate but he was not allowed joining because code of conduct was in force by the Election Commission at that time. Learned counsel submitted that even his salary for his absence period from 12/8/1999 to 10/4/2000 has not SBCWP NO.1927/04. 2 been paid and in this manner, petitioner has been awarded double penalties. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that in fact petitioner did not join on 13/8/1999. He cited the application submitted by the petitioner on 12/7/2002 in which he submitted that he remained under treatment from 4/6/1999 to 12/8/1999 and subsequently when his mother fell ill, he requested for grant of 2 days earned leaves from 2/6/1999 to 3/6/1999, 70 days converted leaves from 4/6/1999 to 12/8/1999 and 241 days earned leave from 13/8/1999 to 10/4/2000. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute the said application but he submits that no information whatsoever has been provided to him as to how and in what manner the aforesaid application has been dealt with. However, further period from 2/6/1999 to 10/4/2000 was regularized by the respondents. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order, I find that the disciplinary authority cannot be said to be wholly unjustified in awarding penalty of stoppage of one annual grade increment without cumulative effect. No interference is called for on that ground. However, respondents should communicate to the petitioner as to how and in what manner they have regulated the aforesaid period from 12/8/1999 to 10/4/2000 and in doing so, if they have already not regularized the said period, they would consider and grant him leave SBCWP NO.1927/04. 3 of whatever kind is due in his account and if eventually leave without pay is not sanctioned, consequential payment shall be made to him. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid direction. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. anil