WP(C) 6023/2003 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA. The petitioner is aggrieved by Annexure-VIII order dated 28.8.2001, by which he was removed from service on the ground of unauthorized absence from duty. As p er own admission of the petitioner, he had to remain away from duty off and on s tarting from 1998. According to the petitioner, he had suffered from some illnes s, which forced him to remain away from duty. However, the fact of the matter is that as the petitioner remained absent from duty unauthorizedly and there was n o application seeking leave and thus, there is no question of payment of arrear salary to the petitioner for the period of absence from duty. Be that as it may, the moot question is as to whether the petitioner could have been removed from service by the aforesaid impugned order dated 28.8.2001 withou t taking recourse to any departmental proceeding. While the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is required to be reinstated in serv ice, learned Standing Counsel, A.S.T.C. submits that considering the entire fact s and circumstances including the present financial condition of the respondent- Corporation, the matter may be left open for the respondents to decide in accord ance with law. In this connection, she has referred to Annexure-IX representatio n dated 12.10.2001 submitted by the petitioner to the Managing Director of the r espondent-Corporation. As already observed above, the authority could not have dispensed with the servi ces of the petitioner by a stroke of pen without taking recourse to any departme ntal proceeding. If the petitioner remained absent from duty unauthorizedly, it was within the jurisdiction and competence of the authority to follow due proced ure towards dispensation of his service. At the same time, the petitioner cannot claim arrear salary for the period of absence. In view of the above, the matter is remanded back to the respondent-Corporation for reconsideration of the impugned order dated 28.8.2001 consisting with the ob servations made above. In the event of reinstatement of the petitioner in servic e, the same will not preclude the respondent-Corporation to initiate the departm ental proceeding and/or to act in the matter in accordance with law. Let the representation be disposed of as expeditiously as possible, but at any r ate, not later than 30th June,2011. Writ petition is disposed of.