HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.15226 of 2008 (O&M) Date of Decision: 24.08.2011 **** Vijay Kumar Sharma . . . . Petitioner VS. State of Punjab & Ors. . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 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? **** Present: Mr. Gaurav Singla, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Sudeepti Sharma, DAG Punjab ***** SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner who approached this Court for the grant of retiral benefits after attaining the age of superannuation on 30.09.2007, has been dismissed from service w.e.f. 30.09.2007 during the pendency of the writ petition vide an order dated 06.11.2007 on the charge of being absent from duty. (2). The above-stated order has been passed by the Director, Ayurveda, Punjab and is admittedly appealable under the Punjab Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1970 (in short, ‘the 1970 Rules’). CWP No.15226 of 2008.doc - 2 – (3). The petitioner’s explanation for remaining absent from duty requires sympathetic consideration by the respondents so that he get his retiral dues. (4). The writ petition is accordingly disposed of by relegating the petitioner to the remedy of appeal under the 1970 Rules. Since the petitioner has been pursuing this case, it is directed that in case the petitioner files a departmental appeal within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, the Appellate Authority shall condone the delay and decide the appeal on merits by passing a speaking order within six months thereafter. (5). Ordered accordingly. Dasti. 24.08.2011 Vishal shonkar (S u r y a K a n t) Judge