Court No. - 35
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 47184 of 2013 Petitioner :- C/M Kabir Balika Vidyalaya Thru Manager And Anr.
Respondent :- State Of U.P.& 3 Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- P.N.Tripathi,R.N. Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Amit Kumar Srivastava,Mir Sayed,Nisheeth Yadav
Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.
Heard Sri P.N. Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned standing counsel for the State-respondents and Sri Adarsh Bhushan, learned counsel for the respondent no.4.
The petitioner Committee of Management has filed the present writ petition praying to quash the order dated 30.07.2013, passed by the respondent no.2 rejecting the representation of the petitioners dated 27.4.2013.
Briefly stated facts of the present case are that the respondent no.4 was Class IV employee (Chowkidar) in the petitioner No.1 institution. He continuously served in the aforesaid institution as Chowkidar for more than 32 years without any complaint or adverse entry against him. His services were found always satisfactory. Since 9.6.2010, he became absent. He explained his absence to be his illness. He moved an application for grant of leave. Subsequently, he filed an application dated 16.2.2013 for leave without pay for the period from 9.6.2010 to 17.2.2013. He also prayed for voluntary retirement. A disciplinary proceeding was initiated against the petitioner for termination of his services. A charge sheet dated 13.6.2012 was issued to him by the Inquiry Officer. He submitted a reply dated 19.6.2012. He stated that he was ill from 9.6.2010 to 21.12.2010 and after recovery he joined on 22.12.2011 and submitted his medical certificates and fitness certificate before the Headmaster but he was not allowed to put his signature in the attendance register and, therefore, he submitted an application dated 23.12.2011 for voluntary retirement. The Inquiry Officer submitted a report dated 24.6.2012 holding that the respondent no.4 deliberately remained absent and thus committed a misconduct. Ultimately, the petitioner No.1 passed an order dated 14.7.2012 proposing to terminate the services of the respondent no.4. On the aforesaid proposal for termination of services, the District Basic Education Officer issued a notice dated 2.2.2013 to the petitioners. However, the petitioners sought adjournment by adjournment application dated 6.2.2013. Ultimately, the District Basic Education Officer passed an order dated 5.3.2013, directing the petitioner to allow the respondent no.4 to join his services and sanction him leave without pay. The proposal for termination of services of the respondent no.4, was thus, not approved. The aforesaid order was not complied with by the petitioners. Therefore, the District Basic Education Officer again passed an order dated 18.3.2013, which was also not complied with and instead a Writ A No.18781 of 2013 (C/M Kabir Balika Vidyalaya Thru Manager and anr. Vs. State Of U.P.& 3 Ors.) was filed Which was disposed of by order dated 8.4.2013, observing as under:
“Since it is an admitted case between the parties that the Basic Education Officer has not passed any order on the proposal sent by the Committee of Management, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the District Basic Education Officer to pass an order on the proposal of the Committee of Management within a period of six weeks after giving a notice and opportunity to the Respondent No.4 as well.”
Thereafter, the District Basic Education Officer sent notices to the petitioners dated 10.6.2013 and 12.7.2013 which were duly served but the petitioners did not appear. Under the circumstances, the District Basic Education Officer considered the facts and evidences available on record and passed the impugned order dated 30.7.2013, directing the petitioners to sanction leave without pay to the respondent no.4. Aggrieved with this order the petitioner Committee of Management has filed the present writ petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has not disputed before me the finding of fact recorded by the respondent no.2 that the respondent no.4 was appointed as Class IV employee on 1.3.1978 and he served as Chowkidar for about 32 years and his services were satisfactory which have been certified upto the year 2009-10. The absence from duty was on account of illness of the respondent no.4 for which he moved an application for leave. It has not been disputed before me that the provision exist for sanction of leave without pay. Under the circumstance, the respondent no.2 has not committed any manifest error of law to direct the petitioners to sanction leave without pay to the respondent no.4 who has rendered uninterrupted 32 years satisfactory service.
In view of the aforesaid, I do not find any illegality in the impugned order. Consequently, the writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed.
Order Date :- 21.8.2018/vkg