IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1011 of 1996 Manikant Upadhyay, son of Chedilal Upadhyay, resident of Village Dindayalpur, Police Station Sultanganj, District Bhagalpur. ------- Petitioner Versus 1. State of Bihar through the Secretary, Water Resources Department, Sinchai Bhawan, Patna. 2. Additional Secretary to the Government of Bihar in the Department of Water Resources, 3rd Secretariat, Patna. 3. Engineer-in-Chief, Department of Water Resources, Government of Bihar, Sinchai Bhawan, Patna. ---------- Respondents ----------- 5 3.5.2011 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner. As with regard to the following prayer of the petitioner; 1. That this is an application for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus or for any other appropriate writ/writs, order/orders or direction /directions commanding the respondents not to act upon and to set aside the order issued vide Memo No. 1506 dated 29th of April, 1994 contained in Annexure 13 of the writ application by which (a) leave granted to the petitioner from 5th of October, 1964 to 20th October, 1964 by the competent authority and which was communicated to the petitioner vide letter no. 3100 dated 30th of August, 1970 has been cancelled. (b) The extraordinary leave granted to the petitioner for the period 21st October 1964 to 10th of January, 1967 by the competent authority 2 and which was communicated to the petitioner vide letter no. 1097 dated 28th of April, 1992 and the grant of the aforesaid leave confirmed by the Government vide order no. 7169 dated 22nd July, 1987 has been cancelled. (c) The department order no. 2502 dated 17th August, 1992 by which seniority of the petitioner was fixed with the consultation of the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms and also the Department of Law, Government of Bihar has been cancelled.” it would appear that the petitioner was initially on the post of Overseer in Kosi Project under the order of the Superintending Engineer, Canal Circle, Purnea vide order dated 5.9.1961. Subsequently, after he had remained absent from duty from October, 1964, he was again appointed as a fresh candidate from the open market on the post of Overseer in River Valley Project Department under the order of Chief Engineer, Tenughat dated 30.12.1966. The second appointment of the petitioner, being a fresh appointment, he could not have claimed, much less, given any extraordinary leave for the period he had remained absent from duty, inasmuch as, his 3 subsequent appointment made in the River Valley Project was a fresh appointment and could not have carried with it the benefit of the post of service on account of first appointment which, he had voluntarily abandoned by remaining absent from duty for a period of nearly three years. This Court therefore does not find any error in the impugned order dated 29.4.1994 by which only his leave for the period 5th October, 1964 to 10th of January, 1967 granted earlier was cancelled after giving him a show-cause notice. The petitioner cannot claim seniority on the basis of his first appointment as he had himself accepted his appointment in the Government by virtue of his second appointment and it was a fresh appointment from open market. That being so, this application is devoid of any merit and is, accordingly, dismissed. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)