MOHAMMAD AMIN DAR Vs. STATE OF J AND K
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
MOHAMMAD AMIN DAR
STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Click here to view full judgement.
G.L.RAINA, J. -
(1.) While working as Junior Assistant in the Directorate of Sainik Welfare, Jammu and Kashmir, the petitioner got promoted to the post of Senior Assistant vide the Order No. 48-EST/DCW/1988, dated May 27, 1988, issued by the Director, Sainik Welfare. Vide the said order he got transferred from Zila Sainik Welfare Office, Srinagar to Zila Sainik Welfare Office, Leh.
(2.) While working in the Sainik Welfare Office, Leh up to July 6, 1988, the petitioner got sanctioned six days casual leave on account of his ill-health. He did not resume his duties thereafter. The admitted fact is that he remained on unauthorised absence with effect from July 12, 1988.
(3.) The petitioner's case is that during the period of sanctioned leave he fell ill as he suffered from the disease of mental depression and was accordingly got admitted under registration No. Z-854 in the wards of the Psychiatric Diseases Hospital, Srinagar as a patient of recurring depressions. His wife Smt. Shaheena Amin sought through written applications extension of his leave. The applications were filed in the Zila Sainik Welfare Office, Srinagar. The first application was filed on October 6, 1988. The petitioner's wife thereafter applied on November 3, 1988, followed by series of applications dated December 26, 1988, February 10, 1989, April 15, 1989, May 20, 1989 and September 15, 1989 for payment of financial assistance so as to enable her to get the petitioner treated. The receipts of these applications is said to have been acknowledged by the Sainik Board, Srinagar. Respondent, Zila Sainik Welfare Officer, Srinagar, is said to have forwarded the leave applications vide his communication No.1/ZEB/1935, dated September 8, 1988 to respondent-Director, Sainik Welfare, Jammu, who in turn is said to have intimated, vide No. 355/EST/DSW/Sgr, 4373-74, dated September 29,1988, respondent No.3 that the medical certificate forwarded in support of the leave application was not properly verified and duly stamped by the issuing doctor. Respondent No.2 had vide the said communication asked respondent No.3 to hold an inquiry into the petitioner's cause of absence from duty with which the petitioner was admittedly not associated.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.