THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.895 of 2004 ORDER: The petitioner was employed as Salesman-cum-Helper in the College of Defence Management, Sainikpuri, the 1st respondent herein, on 17.03.1992. He met with an accident in August 1999 and suffered multiple injuries to right leg. It is stated that he was in Gandhi Hospital as an inpatient for about ten months. Rods were also fixed. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents have not taken him into service after he recovered. A detailed counter affidavit is filed on behalf of the respondents. They admit that the petitioner was appointed. However, according to them, it was on consolidated pay. It is also stated that they have placed him on probation for a period of three months and the counter affidavit is silent as to whether the probation was extended. A sum of Rs.1,000/- is said to have been paid to the petitioner for treatment. According to them, there is no provision for reinstatement of employees who continuously absent for long time. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Central Government. The respondents’ case is that the appointment of petitioner on 17.03.1992 is not on regular basis. Even assuming that the appointment was on consolidated pay of Rs.400/- per month, the fact that he was placed on probation discloses that it was not a casual or daily wages employment. The petitioner sustained multiple injuries in an accident that took place in August 1999. Almost for about one year he was under treatment. When he reported to duty, the respondents ought to have permitted him to join, duly granting leave, which he is otherwise entitled to. Assuming that the petitioner is not entitled for any leave, they ought to have taken him into service at least as a fresh candidate. It is not a case where the petitioner remained absent unauthorisedly without any justifiable cause. Hence, the Writ Petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to take the petitioner into service within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, he shall not be entitled for any back wages for the period during which he was out of service. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J 21st October 2010 cvrk