IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6902 of 2003 Nirmali Banerjee, Wife of Sri Malay Mukherjee, Staff Nurse, Grade ‘A’, C/o Late Tulsi Das Mukherjee, Devendra Nath Das Lane, Langertoli, Patna-4. ------ Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar through its Secretary, Department of Health, Bihar, Patna. 2. The Director in chief, Health Services (Family Planning) Department of Health, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Deputy Director, Health Services (Family Planning), Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 4. The Additional Director (Family Planning) Health Services, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 5. The Superintendent, N.M.C.H. (Contagious Disease Hospital Unit), Patna. 6. The Deputy Superintendent, Contagious Disease Hospital, Agamkuan, Patna. --------- Respondents ----------- 4 19.08.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:- “1(A) A writ of Mandamus commanding the Respondents particularly the Respondent no.2 (Director in chief) and directing them to issue orders for new place of posting and to accept joining at the said new place of posting.” Mr. Anil Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner, in support of the aforementioned prayer, would submit that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Nurse 2 in the year 1974 and while holding such regular post and continued in service till 1987, she had fallen ill in December, 1987 on account of which she had to remain absent from duty till 9.10.1991 but, when she had submitted her joining to the Superintendent of N.M.C.H., he vide his letter no. 626 dated 29.10.1991 had directed the petitioner to submit her joining report in the Directorate of Health, whereafter, it is said that the petitioner also joined in the Directorate on 29.10.1991 but, no decision thereafter has been taken for almost nineteen years. Counsel for the State, despite three indulgences given to him, has not been able to file counter affidavit and in such a situation keeping this writ application pending would be of no avail. In the opinion of this Court, when a person remains absent from the duty even by way of unauthorized absence, his or her services cannot be terminated automatically unless a departmental proceeding is drawn. From the records and the supplementary affidavit in particular filed by the 3 petitioner, it would transpire that the departmental proceeding was drawn against the petitioner vide memo of charge dated 29.7.2005 and the petitioner was also asked to submit her written statement of defence vide directorate of health letter no. 546 dated 9.7.2005 and memo no. 611 dated 29.7.2005 as also another reminder dated 11.8.2005. The petitioner is also said to have filed her explanation on 13.8.2005 but thereafter neither of the parties are aware of the present position. In that view of the matter, this Court would direct the Director-in-chief of the Health Department to take a final decision within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. It is, however, made clear that if such a decision has already been taken about which neither counsel for the petitioner nor the counsel for the State are aware, there would be no need to take another fresh decision and the Director-in-chief would only intimate about such decision by sending a 4 copy of the order to the petitioner. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this application is disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)