IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4462 of 1997 Braj Kishore Singh, son of late Udit Narayan Singh, resident of Village Kharika, P.O. Desari, Police Station Bidupur, District Vaishali. -------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar. 2. Superintendent of Police, Samastipur. 3. D.G. of Police cum Inspector General of Police, Bihar, Patna. 4. Zonal I.G. of Police, Koshi Range, Darbhanga. -------- Respondents ----------- 6 13.5.2011 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner. From perusal of the records of this case, it would be clear that the relief sought for by the petitioner in this case remains confined to acceptance of the joining and payment of salary from 20.1.1996. It has to be kept in mind that initially when the case was listed under the heading ‘Admission’ on 6.1.1999, this Court had taken full note of the case of the petitioner, wherein, it was recorded as follows:- “From the pleadings of the parties and the submissions made at the bar, it appears that the petitioner was reverted from one post of ASI to that of Constable on 20.8.1995 on the charge of departmental proceeding. It is said that the reversion order was to remain in force for two years i.e. up to 20.8.1997. It may be mentioned that 2 the copy of the order dated 20.8.95 has not been brought on record. The petitioner claims to have submitted his joining on 20.1.96. The Respondents do not deny that the petitioner had submitted his joining except that it was received on 27.1.96. Nothing however, has been stated in the affidavit as to whether any order was passed on the joining report or not. The petitioner has remained out of office during the entire intervening period from 20.8.95. In course of hearing counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, took the stand that the period of two years having expired, the petitioner may be allowed to join as ASI of Police. He also alternatively submitted that the petitioner is prepared to join on the post of constable whereafter the question of restoration of post of ASI may be considered by the Superintendent of Police. This writ petition was filed on 7.5.1997. Prima facie, it is not understandable as to why the petitioner took so much time to approach the court for necessary direction in the matter of acceptance of his joining. Perhaps, the petitioner might be thinking that after expiry of two years period, he may not be compelled to join in the lower post of constable. If that is so, he may not be entitled to the consequential benefits of restoration of the post of ASI or salary for the intervening period. At this stage I do not want to 3 express my concluded opinion. Counter affidavit filed by the Respondents is cryptic and does not deal with the issues involved. I direct the Superintendent of Police, Samastipur to examine the matter and file an affidavit sworn by himself within one month. This matter will be on board on 10.2.99. Let a copy of this order be handed over to Addl. A.G.I.” Subsequently, the writ application was admitted on 25.2.1999, wherein, an interim order was passed to the following effect:- “It is open for the petitioner to approach the Superintendent of Police of the concerned district. If he goes there the Superintendent of Police will pass an appropriate order taking into consideration that the petitioner has not joined as constable during the period of reversion.” From the counter affidavit, which has been filed by the respondents in this case, it is clear that the petitioner was appointed as Literate Constable on 18.8.1970 and was promoted to the rank of A.S.I. of Police on 1.4.1981 and became absent from duty since 13.7.1991.He had remained absent from duty between 13.7.1991 to 22.12.1992 without leave and 4 information to the department. Again the petitioner absented himself from 4.2.1993. The respondents, therefore, had drawn four departmental proceedings against him being proceedings no. 87 of 1989, 88 of 1989, 89 of 1989 and 109 of 1990 and he was reverted to the post of constable by an order dated 20.8.1995. As noted above, the petitioner did not submit his joining on the post of constable and remained happily absenting even thereafter. In that view of the matter, the grievance of the petitioner for payment of salary from 20.1.1996 is wholly misconceived. The petitioner was a member of the police force and if he had voluntarily remained absent from duty without obtaining prior leave, he cannot expect this Court to grant relief by way of a direction for payment of salary for the period he had never worked. Be that as it may, there is nothing on record to show that when this Court had passed an interim order dated 25.2.1999 giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the Superintendent of Police for acceptance 5 of his joining as constable, any order was passed allowing his prayer or not. In that view of the matter, this application has become infructuous and is dismissed accordingly. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)