IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civl Writ Petition No.9029 of 2011 Date of Decision : May 20, 2011. Ashok Kumar .....Petitioner versus The State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.R.K.Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) The petitioner joined the respondent-Department as Math Master on adhoc basis w.e.f. 29.11.1975 and his services were regularized w.e.f. 1.4.1977. The petitioner admittedly remained absent from duty w.e.f. 1.7.1987 to 28.7.1998. The petitioner claims that vide order dated 24.8.1999/6.10.1999 (Annexure P-1), the period of his absence from duty has been regularized as the same has been decided not to treat as duty period. The petitioner has retired from service w.e.f. 31.10.2010 on attaining the age of superannuation. The Accountant General (A & E), Punjab, vide memo dated 23.3.2011 (Annexure P-5) has raised an objection that the order Annexure P-1 cannot be treated as an order regularizing the CWP No.9029 of 2011 [2] absence period of the petitioner and a separate order needs to be passed in this regard. There appears to be some substance in the objection raised by the Accountant General, Punjab, as much as the Competent Authority having decided that the absence period cannot be treated as duty period, needs to pass an appropriate order as to how the absence period is to be treated. In the absence of such an order, the service rendered by the petitioner before and after his absence from duty cannot be tagged for the purpose of retiral dues. In these circumstances and without expressing any views on the petitioner's entitlement, I deem it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to respondent No.1 to take an appropriate decision in accordance with the provisions contained in the Rules regarding regularization of absence period of the petitioner and thereafter, re-submit his pension case so that the needful can be done at the earliest. Let an appropriate order in this regard be passed within a period of three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Ordered accordingly. Dasti. May 20, 2011 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE