JUDGMENT Rakesh Tiwari, J.
1. The petitioner was appointed on 24.8.1973 as a teacher in Urdu subject under a scheme known as Half Million Job, for teaching in Primary School, Daraganj, Allahabad. He worked upto 2nd November, 1976 and thereafter, he sought leave w.e.f. 3.11.1976 to 26.12.1976 but could not attend his duties as he was ill. It is alleged that he applied for medical leave. He further states that he moved applications from time to time for extension of leave. The petitioner avers that after he regained his health and recovered from effect of paralysis and reported for duties on 9.12.1991, but his salary was not paid. The Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Allahabad, called for a report from Shiksha Adhikari Nagar Kshettra, Allahabad, regarding the period of absence of the petitioner for about 15 years. The report was submitted on 13.4.1992 but it is alleged that no decision was taken about payment of his salary. Thereafter, the petitioner filed Writ Petition No. Nil of 1993. This petition was decided with a direction to the respondent No. 1 Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Allahabad to decide the matter within six weeks vide order and judgment dated 2.11.1993.
2. In pursuance of the judgment dated 2.11.1993. respondent No. 1 again called for report from respondent No. 3 vide letter dated 27.12.1993. The report was accordingly submitted to the effect that the petitioner had continuously applied for medical leave along with medical certificate and his services have yet not been terminated. On the basis of the report, the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Allahabad by order dated 6.11.1994 held that the medical leave for 365 days with pay and for 90 days with half and rest without pay can be granted but since the petitioner has been absenting continuously for more than 15 years, he has lost his lien on the post.
3. Aggrieved by order dated 6.1.1994 the petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 9938 of 1994 which was disposed of with the observation that if an appeal is filed by the petitioner, it shall be decided within 3 months, In pursuance of the order dated 24.12.1995 passed in the aforesaid Writ Petition No. 9938 of 1994 the petitioner filed an appeal which was dismissed by the appellate authority vide order dated 19.6.1995.
4. By the impugned order dated 19.6.1995 in the appeal, it has been held that since the applications of the petitioner are not on record, in view of the report dated 29.12.1993, order dated 6.1.1994 passed by the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Allahabad and perusal of letter dated 26.7.1991 of the Parishad, it is established fact that the petitioner had not performed any work during the period 31st December, 1976 to 8th December, 1991, te. for about 15 years. It has been further held that if the period of 3-1/2 years is also added w.e.f. 8.12.1991, the total period comes to 18 years 6 months, during which the petitioner had not done any teaching work. The Secretary, U. P. Basic Shiksha Parishad, Allahabad, has also held that only U.P.C. have been produced by the petitioner in support of his contention that he has sent applications for leave, whereas according to leave report there are no such applications in the records, as such U.P.C. will itself not prove the case of the petitioner that he had sent applications. The Secretary has also relied upon the order dated 6.1.1994 passed by the Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Allahabad and the provisions of Financial Handbook (Vol. 2) Rule 18 and has held that there is no force in the contention of the petitioner. Rule 18 provides as under :
"Unless the Government in view of the special circumstances of the case, shall otherwise determine after 5 years continuous absence from duty classes that on foreign services in India, whether with or without leave a Government servant ceases to be a Government employee."
5. Section 18 of the Financial Handbook came in 1989 and is applicable to the petitioner who remained absent up to mid 1995 i.e., total 18 years 6 months. The Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Allahabad, has relied upon report that there no applications submitted by the petitioner. He has disbelieved the U.P.C's. produced by the petitioner. A person who continuously remained absent for about 18-1/2 years cannot claim continuity and even otherwise under Rule 18 of the Financial Handbook, he loses his lien on the post.
6. That in paragraph 2 of the writ petition, it has been stated that the petitioner had joined his duties on 27.12.1976 and thereafter took medical leave. It is not at all clear from averments of the petitioner as to when he took the medical leave. The averments made in paragraph 2 are wholly vague and do not establish his continuity. It appears that the petitioner might have submitted joining letter on 27.12.1976 for a day, but this will not wash out his absence for a period of more than 18-1/2 years.
7. There is no illegality in the Impugned orders dated 6.1.1994 and 19.6.1995. In the aforesaid circumstances, no writ can be issued directing the respondent to allow the petitioner to perform his duties without any interference and pay his salary month to month. The writ petition fails and is dismissed.
8. No order as to cost.