-1- Civil Writ Petition No.14495 of 2007. IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ... Date of Decision: May 13, 2008. Ram Sarup ... Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana and another ... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL. 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. Naresh Kaushik, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. O.P. Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr. Vinish Singla, Advocate, for respondent No.1. -.- MOHINDER PAL, J. The petitioner joined the respondent-Department as Chowkidar in January 1988. It is averred in the petition that daughter of the petitioner, aged about fifteen years, left the house due to some mental disturbance. He had been searching for her and, therefore, could not attend to his duties from -2- Civil Writ Petition No.14495 of 2007. August 14, 1999 to November 16, 1999 The respondent- department issued charge sheet to the petitioner for this lapse of remaining absent from duty without leave. It is further averred in the petition that the petitioner applied for leave from May 12, 2001 to May 20, 2001 on the ground that his brother-in-law had died. The respondent-department rejected the leave application. Another charge sheet was issued to the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner was transferred to Sonepat. He submitted application dated nil (Annexure P-5) for getting pre- mature retirement on the ground that his daughter was missing since last four/five years and his wife had gone mad due to this shock. There was nobody to look after his wife. A departmental inquiry was conducted against the petitioner. Charges of remaining absent from duty were proved. Vide order dated February 24, 2003 (Annexure P-6) passed by the Managing Director, Haryana Women Development Corporation, Chandigarh (respondent No.2), services of the petitioner were terminated with immediate effect. He preferred an appeal against this order, which was also dismissed by the competent authority vide order dated December 19,2006 (Annexure P-7). Hence this writ petition. In the written statement filed by respondent No.2, it has been stated that the petitioner was given warning for the first time within three months of his joining the department for absenting from duty vide letter dated April 12,1988. Subsequently, the petitioner had been absenting himself from -3- Civil Writ Petition No.14495 of 2007. duty on several occasions without any intimation. Explanations of the petitioner were called in this regard vide letters dated September 18, 1990, October 12,1990, November 07, 1990, January 17, 1991, May 10, 1991, August 21, 1991, January 12, 1992, May 19, 1992, June 18, 1992, July 16, 1992, January 18, 1994, May 03, 1994 and on many other occasions. He was suspended earlier on August 21,1992 for his absence from duty. His suspension was revoked vide order dated September 21, 1992. Subsequently, he was charge sheeted on April 20, 1993. He was awarded punishment of stoppage of three increments vide order dated March 06, 1996 (Annexure R-2/1). The petitioner remained absent from duty for more than two years i.e from March 13,1995 to August 04, 1997 without any prior information to the respondent-Department. It has also been mentioned in the written statement that in May, 1991, when explanation of the petitioner was sought for remaining absent from duty, he took the stand vide letter Annexure R-2/2 that his son had lost and he kept on searching for him. So far as request of the petitioner for voluntary retirement is concerned, it has been stated that since he did not complete twenty years' continuous service, the same was declined. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the records of the case, we do not find any ground which may warrant interference by this Court in exercise of writ jurisdiction. The conduct of the petitioner has been explained by the respondents in the written statement. The petitioner is -4- Civil Writ Petition No.14495 of 2007. habitual of absenting himself from duty on one pretext or the other. In the departmental inquiry, the petitioner did not lead even an iota of evidence to prove that her daughter was missing or that his wife had gone mad. On May 09, 1991, the petitioner had written a letter to respondent No.2 explaining his absence from duty, which is Annexure R-2/2 and reads as under:- “ I beg to state that on 4.5.1991, I came to know that my son has been lost, therefore, I had to go back to home. I had to go to my relatives to find my son due to which I could not take the leave from the office nor I could attend the office.” On December 05, 2002, the petitioner had sent communication (Annexure R-2/3) to respondent No.2, which reads as under:- “ It is stated that you are sending notices after notices to me. I have already stated that as per my earlier correspondence on 10.4.2002 District Sonepat, please send my CPF fund as I cannot work at far off places. I have no concern with these letters and you please send the balance amount of CPF as I cannot come to your office. My wife is ill and my -5- Civil Writ Petition No.14495 of 2007. daughter has been lost. Kindly send my CPF amount. I shall be obliged. “ The above facts reveal that the petitioner never attended to his duties with any sense of devotion or responsibility. He was issued various notices, suspended once and awarded sentence of stoppage of three increments, but he did not improve his conduct. The order terminating the services of the petitioner is a well-reasoned one. He was also afforded personal hearing by the Appellate Authority on December 19, 2006, while deciding appeal of the petitioner. No convincing reason could be put forth by the petitioner justifying his conduct. Resultantly, this petition is hereby dismissed being without any merit. ( HEMANT GUPTA ) ( MOHINDER PAL ) JUDGE JUDGE May 13, 2008. ak