IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP(T) No.8074 of 2008 (OA No.2972 of 2001) Date of decision: November 18, 2011. Smt. Rita Prabhakar. …. Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. …. Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, J. Whether approved for reporting ?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Rajesh Verma, Advocate. For the respondents. Mr. A.K. Bansal, Addl. Advocate General. Surinder Singh, J (oral). Petitioner Smt. Rita Prabhakar initially filed the Original Application before the erstwhile Tribunal, in the year 2001, which was transferred to this Court on its abolition. 2. By means of the present petition, the petitioner mainly sought the following relief(s):- 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? - 2 - (i) “That the present O.A. may kindly be allowed and respondents may kindly be directed to restore forfeiting services from 1.3.1971 to 7.10.1975 which were duly verified by the competent authority which cannot be undone in arbitrary manner as has been done by the respondent No.2 vide order dated 13.3.80 and the same may be counted for pensionary benefit. (ii) Salary alongwith interest for the period from 6.10.79 to 5.3.1980 may be ordered to be allowed to the applicant as during the said period the applicant was on duty. (iii) That the order of reappointment of dated 5.3.1980 Vide A-II & A-I may be set-aside and quashed and order of confirmation from 13.2.1980 should be upheld. (iv) That under Rules the leave from 8.10.75 to 5.10.79 may also be ordered to be sanctioned and this period be allowed to be continued as qualifying service.” 3. Heard and gone through the record. 4. In the year 1971, petitioner was appointed as Trained Graduate Teacher (TGT) in the Education Department and worked as such till 7.10.1975. Thereafter, she alleged to have applied for casual leave on 8.10.1975, but did not join her duties till - 3 - 5.3.1980 and as per respondents, she allegedly remained absent willfully during the period aforesaid. Accordingly, she was charge-sheeted, but on taking into consideration the compassionate circumstances, she was re-appointed on 6.3.1980 against the said post and the unauthorized period of absence was treated as dies-non. To this effect, the entry in her service-book was also made. She did not raise any objection. After 13 years, in the year 1993, she claimed her withheld salary w.e.f. 6.10.1979 to 5.3.1980 on the plea that she gave birth to a still child in December, 1975 in Civil Hospital, Solan and she submitted an application for leave alongwith medical certificate to the Headmistress of Government Middle School Bohli (Solan), where she was posted. The said Headmistress extended her leave from time to time. When she became medically fit, she joined her duties, after submitting medical certificate and fitness to the Headmistress on 7.11.1979 and performed the duties till 5.3.1980. - 4 - 5. The respondent in reply stated that an inquiry to the allegations aforesaid was conducted by third respondent and it was found that she had wrongly marked her presence by fixing papers in the attendance register, tampering the official record, as such she was issued a show cause notice and accordingly dealt with departmentally. 6. Even after the year 1993, the petitioner remained silent for another 18 years and in the year 2001, she preferred an O.A. No.110 of 2001 in the year 2001 before the then Administrative Tribunal. It was ordered to be treated as representation to be decided by the Secretary within two months. After hearing the petitioner, the third respondent dismissed the same, but the petitioner intends to seek a fresh lease of life from the order Annexure-I dated October 2001, to set aside the order of her reappointment passed in the year 1980. 7. The prayer sought for cannot be allowed on the ground of latches and delay. Thus, there is no ground for issuing any direction to the respondents to grant - 5 - any relief as prayed for. Therefore, the petition is dismissed. November 18, 2011. (Surinder Singh), (Pds) Judge.