IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 18TH JULY 2008 / 27TH ASHADHA 1930 WA.No. 1160 of 2005(A) --------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.20783/2003 DATED 03/03/2005. .................... APPELLANT/ PETITIONER: -------------------------------------- K. VASUDEVAN, CHARUVILA VEEDU, PANKONAM,MUKHATHALA (P.O),KOLLAM. U.D. CLERK (RETIRED), LABOUR AND REHABILITATION (C) DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI. THALIYAL. R.GOPAKUMAR. RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------------------- 1. THE REGIONAL JOINT LABOUR COMMISSIONER, KOLLAM. 2. THE LABOUR COMMISSIONER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, LABOUR AND REHABILITATION (C) DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. K. SANDESH RAJA. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/07/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. J.B.KOSHY & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ. -------------------------------------- W.A.No.1160 OF 2005 ------------------------------------- Dated 18th July, 2008 JUDGMENT Koshy,J . Appellant/petitioner while working as Lower Division Clerk in the District Labour Office, Thiruvananthapuram, absented from his office from 8.9.1996 onwards till 15.9.1999. According to the petitioner, he could not attend the office due to illness. As he was unauthorisedly absent, Ext.P1 memo of charges was served on him. After considering the explanation offered by the petitioner, the disciplinary authority finalised the proceedings holding that no punishment as contemplated by the disciplinary rules need be imposed. That was done taking a lenient view in the light of the observations in the enquiry report and regarding the submission of a belated medical certificate and also taking the fact that he was due to retire on 31.12.2000. The unathorised absence was for a long period from 8.9.1996 to 15.9.1999. He was allowed to join duty only because he has to retire from service on 31.12.2000. For the period from 6.9.1996 to 18.2.1998, the petitioner produced a belated medical certificate. Nothing prevented him from applying for leave. Even if he was not well, he should have sent medical certificate through post or through a messenger. From 19.2.1998 onwards, he has not W.A.1160/2005 2 applied for medical leave also. According to him, he has offered willingness to join duty. Considering all these matters, a very lenient view was taken and disciplinary action was dropped. Petitioner was asked to apply for eligible leave during the period from 6.9.1996 to 16.9.1999. In appeal the Government decided that If he has no eligible leave, the period from 8.6.1996 to 18.2.1998 has to be taken as leave without allowances and the remaining period from 19.2.1998 to 16.9.1999 should be treated as unauthorized absence and the unauthorized absence period cannot be counted for any service benefits, but, at the same time, it cannot be treated as break in service. We are of the opinion that undue leniency is given to the petitioner and we agree with the learned single Judge that disciplinary authority has taken a very sympathetic view. Since we fully agree with the reasoning of the learned single Judge, we are not reiterating the other reasons given by the learned single Judge. The appeal is dismissed. J.B.KOSHY JUDGE P.N.RAVINDRAN JUDGE tks