Civil Writ Petition No.8866 of 2007 :1 :
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Date of Decision: November 10, 2009
Kanwar Pal Singh
...Petitioner
VERSUS
The State of Haryana & others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH
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.Ravi Verma, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr.Harish Rathee, Sr.DAG, Haryana,
for the State.
*****
RANJIT SINGH, J.
On 13/14.10.2003, the petitioner was transferred from
Government Senior Secondary School, Ghamroj Alipur (Gurgaon) to
Government High School, Jodhpuria (Sirsa). The petitioner was
relieved on 12.4.2004 to join at the new place. When the petitioner
Civil Writ Petition No.8866 of 2007 :2 :
reported at School in Sirsa, he was informed by the Headmaster to
contact the office of District Education Officer, Sirsa. He was not
allowed to join as there was no vacant post of Math Master lying at
the school. The petitioner went to the office of District Education
Officer, who wrote a letter to respondent No.2 to issue a fresh
posting order of the petitioner. On 19.5.2004, a fresh posting order of
the petitioner was issued posting him to Government Senior
Secondary School, Dariyapur (Fatehabad). Petitioner accordingly
joined at the said place on 20.5.2004 and thereafter was transferred
to Government High School, Kharati Khera (Fatehabad) on
17.8.2004. The petitioner retired therefrom on 31.7.2006. In view of
this, the period from 13.4.2004 to 20.5.2004 of the service of the
petitioner has been treated as leave of kind due. On account of this,
the petitioner is also deprived of this period for the purpose of
encashment as well. The petitioner accordingly has filed this writ
petition to impugn this action of the respondents.
In their reply filed, the respondents would say that this
period from 13.4.2004 to 20.5.2004 has been treated as a leave of
kind due instead of duty period as it was a compulsory waiting
period. It is stated that the petitioner was duty bound to join at a
place within a reasonable time where he was ordered to be
transferred, but he failed to abide by the department directions and
remained posted there for almost six months.
It is not understood as to how the petitioner can be
blamed for this period. The petitioner had reported as per the
directions to a school where there was no vacant post of Math
Master. Thereafter the petitioner was posted to a place where he
Civil Writ Petition No.8866 of 2007 :3 :
joined. If he has retained at the place from where he was transferred
for some particular period, the responsibility for that would squarely
be that of the respondents. Under these circumstances, the action of
the respondents in treating this period as a leave of kind due does
not seem to be just and fair.
The State counsel was accordingly directed to have
instructions in this regard vide order dated 17.8.2009. The counsel,
however, pleads that he has received no response. The manner in
which the cases are being dealt with would not sound satisfactory.
Once the directions are issued by the court and the counsel makes
an approach, there should be a response either way. There is no
cause for any further wait. The writ petition deserves to be allowed.
Directions are hereby issued to the respondents to treat this period
from 13.4.2004 to 20.5.2004 as a period spent on duty. Necessary
consequences of the same would be that the petitioner would be
entitled to receive the leave encashment for this period. The same
be also released to the petitioner within a period of two months from
the date of receipt of copy of this order.
November 10, 2009 ( RANJIT SINGH ) ramesh JUDGE