C.W.P. No.2453 of 1990 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.2453 of 1990 Date of Decision: 18.11.2010 Sh. Kundan Singh Saund (died) through LRs. ……Petitioner Versus The State of Punjab and another ……Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI -.- Present: None for the petitioner. Mr. S.S. Gill, D.A.G., Punjab. Mr. M.S. Bedi, Advocate for respondent No.2. 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? AJAY TEWARI, J. (ORAL) By this petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated 23.01.1990 (Annexure P/-5) whereby his services have been terminated on the ground of ill health. The petitioner was appointed as Overseer vide appointment letter dated 06.11.1963. On 05.07.1989 there was an C.W.P. No.2453 of 1990 -2- incident in the premises where the petitioner was beaten up. He wrote a complaint dated 06.07.1989 and thereafter proceeded on leave on 05.08.1989. Since he did not join back the impugned order was passed terminating his services on the ground of ill health as per Bye-law 49(c) of the respondent-Mill which is reproduced hereinbelow:- “49(c)Termination of service due to continued long illness:- If an employee is absent for three months continuously owing to illness, or in the event of his absence through illness for broken periods aggregating to 45 or more during any period of six months, the Society reserves the right to terminate his service without notice.” The allegation of the petitioner is that his application for medical leave was never rejected and had he been informed about the same he would have joined back inspite of his ill health. This fact is not denied in the written statement. It is, however, averred that the impugned order was not passed by way of punishment and therefore the petitioner would be entitled to be treated as a retrenched employee. In my considered opinion, the act of the respondent-Mill cannot be justified. It must be noticed that by order dated 03.10.1989 (Annexure P/-4) the petitioner was suspended for alleged C.W.P. No.2453 of 1990 -3- serious irregularities, however, neither any charge-sheet was issued nor any inquiry was initiated but straightway the services of the petitioner were terminated on the ground of ill health. Thus the petitioner alleged that the order of termination is a veiled punishment order. In the opinion of this Court, even if the version of the petitioner that in fact his services were terminated as a result of punishment is not accepted, yet in the circumstances of the case the termination of the services of a person who had service of around 26 years and that too on the ground of ill health cannot be justified. However, it cannot be also lost sight of that a person who is continuously absent owing to illness cannot be permitted to continue in the job of Overseer where he has to climb up high buildings and otherwise superintend work in the large complex of the Mill. In the circumstances, it would be more appropriate if the order of termination is converted to that of retirement. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the direction that instead of the petitioner’s services being terminated w.e.f. 23.01.1990 it would be deemed that the petitioner is retired w.e.f. the said date. Since none has appeared on behalf of the petitioner the registry is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the legal representatives of the petitioner by way of registered post. Respondent No.2 is directed to workout the retirement C.W.P. No.2453 of 1990 -4- benefits of the petitioner and release them to the petitioner’s LRs within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. In case the aforesaid payments are not released within the aforesaid period then the petitioner would be entitled to interest @ 10% from the date the various amount(s) fell due till the date they are paid. ( AJAY TEWARI ) November 18, 2010 JUDGE ashish