IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13126 of 2005 RANDHIR SINGH S/O LATE BADRI NATH SINGH, R/O VILL- LODIPUR, PS- MOHANDIA, DISTT- ARBAL AT PRESENT POSTED AS PEON IN THE OFFICE OF RURAL DERVELOPMENT SPL. DIVISION, ARBAL--PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE COLLECTOR, BUXAR 3. THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR,ESTAB. BUXAR 4. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, RERAL DEVELOPMENT SPL. PRACHHETRA HARDING ROAD, BARRACK PATNA-2 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, RURAL DEVELOPMENT SPECIAL DIVISION-1 BUXAR------------------RESPONDENTS. ----------- 2 7.9.2010 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Annexure-4 is the order by which the respondent authority have treated the period of unauthorized absence of the petitioner to be one of extraordinary leave. Admittedly it came during enquiry that petitioner absented himself from duty from 19.6.2000 to 31.7.2000 without permission of the controlling officer. In that background the suspension order came to be passed and an enquiry was initiated. Based on the finding the impugned order contained in annexure-4 came to be passed. Petitioner has now brought a medical certificate issued by the Kurji Holy Family Hospital indicating that he was hospitalized and that was the reason for his absence. The proper thing for the petitioner would have been to produce the evidence in the enquiry and not annex it with the writ application making out a third case. Even otherwise it is open to the authority to reconsider the issue from the point of view that if there were leave of other kinds available for the petitioner for the period of - 2 - absence then the same may be first utilized and only left over period should be treated to be a period of extraordinary leave. If the petitioner moves the authority they will communicate their decision on this issue to him within a reasonable time frame. This writ application is disposed of with the above observation. RPS (Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J.)