STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. MOHAMMED AYUB NAZ
LAWS(SC)-2006-1-6
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: RAJASTHAN)
Decided on January 03,2006

STATE OF RAJASTHAN Appellant
VERSUS
MOHAMMED AYUB NAZ Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

USHA WADHWA VS. RESERVE BANK OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2006-11-80] [REFERRED TO]
GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI VS. H C RADHEY SHYAM [LAWS(DLH)-2010-8-86] [REFERRED TO]
MUKESHKUMAR R VALAND VS. MANAGING DIRECTOR [LAWS(GJH)-2006-3-75] [REFERRED TO]
UTTAR PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [LAWS(ALL)-2006-4-136] [REFERRED TO]
MUNNA LAL SHARMA VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2006-8-153] [REFERRED TO]
RAMESH PAL SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(ALL)-2007-8-227] [REFERRED TO]
DHARAMRAJ KUMAR SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(GAU)-2007-5-33] [REFERRED TO]
JOSEPH ZIMIK VS. STATE OF MANIPUR [LAWS(GAU)-2007-6-28] [REFERRED TO]
MANJU DEVI VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2011-1-114] [REFERRED TO]
G V TRIVENI PRASAD VS. SYNDICATE BANK [LAWS(APH)-2006-11-6] [REFERRED TO]
K NATRAJAN VS. STATION COMMANDER AIR FORCE STATION [LAWS(APH)-2007-4-15] [REFERRED TO]
TELECOM DISTRICT MANAGER VS. R GOPALA RAO [LAWS(APH)-2009-6-36] [REFERRED TO]
N CHIRTRARASAN VS. INSPECTOR OF SWS CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE [LAWS(MAD)-2006-9-173] [REFERRED TO]
G VIJAYAN VS. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT [LAWS(MAD)-2007-8-198] [REFERRED TO]
SENIOR MANAGER KELLYDEN TEA ESTATE VS. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2012-3-63] [REFERRED TO]
ABHA CHAWLA MOHANTY VS. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD [LAWS(BOM)-2011-11-78] [REFERRED TO]
N UTHANDAVAN VS. REGISTRAR CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL [LAWS(MAD)-2009-7-472] [REFERRED TO]
S RETNA BAI VS. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2009-10-198] [REFERRED TO]
R VEERAMANI VS. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT HOME DEPARTMENT [LAWS(MAD)-2009-11-384] [REFERRED TO]
N K MANI VS. ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE CUM COMMISSIONER OF POLICE [LAWS(MAD)-2011-2-65] [REFERRED TO]
LAXMI LAL VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2007-9-17] [REFERRED TO]
BHOLA SINGH VS. STATE OF M.P. [LAWS(CHH)-2006-8-16] [REFERRED TO]
BIDYUT KUMAR PANJA VS. WEST BENGAL BOARD OF PRIMARY EDUCATION [LAWS(CAL)-2012-10-53] [REFERRED TO]
PANCHAM SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2013-4-312] [REFERRED TO]
AMIT KATYAL VS. GAIL INDIA LTD. [LAWS(DLH)-2014-7-63] [REFERRED TO]
KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION VS. SHAMANNA [LAWS(KAR)-2014-1-271] [REFERRED TO]
DR. (MRS.) USHA WADHWA VS. THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, [LAWS(DLH)-2006-1-225] [REFERRED TO]
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, SHIMLA VS. MOHINDER SINGH MALHI AND ORS. [LAWS(HPH)-2015-5-80] [REFERRED TO]
MANAGING DIRECTOR, PRTC AND ORS. VS. GURDEV SINGH AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-2015-4-349] [REFERRED TO]
NORTH EASTERN KARNATAKA R T CORPN VS. ASHAPPA [LAWS(SC)-2006-5-24] [REFERRED TO]
L K VARMA VS. H M T LTD [LAWS(SC)-2006-1-50] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U P VS. SHEO SHANKER LAL SRIVASTAVA [LAWS(SC)-2006-2-53] [REFERRED TO]
CHAIRMAN AND M D BHARAT PET CORP LTD VS. T K RAJU [LAWS(SC)-2006-2-8] [REFERRED TO]
BOMBAY DYEING AND MFG CO LTD VS. BOMBAY ENVIRONMENT ACTION GROUP [LAWS(SC)-2006-3-10] [REFERRED TO]
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA VS. GEORGE PHILIP [LAWS(SC)-2006-11-146] [REFERRED TO]
BSES RAJDHANI POWER LTD VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2011-7-4] [REFERRED TO]
JAMERUDDIN VS. STATE OF MANIPUR [LAWS(GAU)-2010-3-54] [REFERRED TO]
HEMANT KUMAR VS. BHIM RAO AMBEDKAR [LAWS(ALL)-2011-1-102] [REFERRED TO]
KISHORI LAL VS. CHAIRMAN BOARD OF DIRECTORS ALIGARH GRAMIN BANK ALIGARH [LAWS(ALL)-2011-1-49] [REFERRED TO]
KRISHNA NAND PANDEY VS. DIRECTOR NORTH CENTRAL ZONE CULTURAL CENTRE [LAWS(ALL)-2011-7-28] [REFERRED TO]
M GOPALA KRISHNA VS. DIVISIONAL SECRETARY COMMISSIONER RAILWAY PROTECTION FORCE [LAWS(APH)-2006-7-54] [REFERRED TO]
M GOPALA KRISHNA VS. DIVISIONAL SECRETARY COMMISSIONER RAILWAY PROTECTION FORCE [LAWS(APH)-2006-7-54] [REFERRED TO]
MANAGEMENT OF M S ASIAN BEARINGS LTD VS. PRESIDING OFFICER [LAWS(MAD)-2011-7-59] [REFERRED TO]
BRIJLAL VS. STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD [LAWS(CHH)-2010-2-23] [REFERRED TO]
TRIBHUVAN VALLABH JOSHI VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2011-9-19] [REFERRED TO]
A.ARULDOSS VS. GENERAL MANAGER SOUTHERN RAILWAY CHENNAI [LAWS(MAD)-2012-12-65] [REFERRED TO]
MANAGEMENT B.M.T.C. VS. E. BALAKRISHNA [LAWS(KAR)-2012-12-22] [REFERRED TO]
BIDYUT KUMAR PANJA VS. WEST BENGAL BOARD OF PRIMARY [LAWS(CAL)-2012-10-104] [REFERRED TO]
ABBAS ALI VS. STATE BANK OF INDIA [LAWS(GAU)-2013-2-11] [REFERRED TO]
S.UNNIKRISHNAN NAIR VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(KER)-2013-7-1] [REFERRED TO]
M/S. HALDYN GLASS LIMITED VS. MAHARASHTRA GENERAL KAMGAR UNION [LAWS(BOM)-2014-2-83] [REFERRED TO]
VIJAY KUMAR SINGH VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2014-4-18] [REFERRED TO]
HRISHIKESH BHATTACHARJEE VS. INDIAN BANK A NATIONALIZED BANK [LAWS(MEGH)-2014-3-22] [REFERRED TO]
K. Sippe Gowda, S/o Late Chikka Javaregowda, High Court of Karnataka VS. The High Court Karnataka represented by its Registrar General, The Honble Chief Justice and The Disciplinary Authority, High Court of Karnataka represented by its Registrar [LAWS(KAR)-2011-3-228] [REFERRED TO]
PREM NARAIN SINHA VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(CA)-2014-1-3] [REFERRED TO]
K.R. ALVA VS. HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. [LAWS(CA)-2003-1-12] [REFERRED TO]
RANG NATH MISRA VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(CA)-2014-2-8] [REFERRED TO]
JAMOTRI SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(CA)-2014-4-9] [REFERRED TO]
JAGDISH CHANDER VS. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN [LAWS(CA)-2012-5-15] [REFERRED TO]
VIKRAM VERMA VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(CA)-2014-2-29] [REFERRED TO]
SREENIVASA VS. THE DIRECTOR AND APPELLATE AUTHORITY AND ORS. [LAWS(CA)-2014-7-76] [REFERRED TO]
TAPAN KUMAR CHAKARVARTI VS. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [LAWS(CA)-2015-3-51] [REFERRED TO]
THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. VS. VIJAY KUMAR [LAWS(MEGH)-2015-8-1] [REFERRED TO]
DEVESH KUMAR MISRA VS. CHIEF SECURITY COMMISSIONER R P F [LAWS(ALL)-2015-5-417] [REFERRED TO]
S.P. MANGLA VS. EXPORT INSPECTION COUNCIL OF INDIA AND ORS. [LAWS(DLH)-2009-10-290] [REFERRED TO]
K. SURESH VS. THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [LAWS(KAR)-2015-10-219] [REFERRED TO]
KALAKAR CHAKRA VS. ORISSA GRAMYA BANK [LAWS(ORI)-2016-5-12] [REFERRED TO]
SAUDAGAR SINGH VS. PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-2006-11-150] [REFERRED]
SURINDER KAUR VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2012-8-173] [REFERRED TO]
SHEO SHANKER LAL AGRAWAL VS. STATE PUBLIC SERVICES TRIBUNAL, LUCKNOW AND ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-2009-3-218] [REFERRED TO]
JAI PRAKASH VS. THE SERVICE MANAGER, U.P.S.R.T.C., GHAZIABAD AND OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2007-5-402] [REFERRED TO]
BHAWANI SHANKAR SHARMA VS. THE REGIONAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE AND ANR. [LAWS(RAJ)-2011-8-171] [REFERRED]
DR. MURLI DHAR UPADHYAY VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2006-7-121] [REFERRED TO]
NARENDRA SINGH VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS [LAWS(RAJ)-2008-10-64] [REFERRED]
DINESH CHANDRA JAIN SON OF LATE SHEEL CHANDRA JAIN VS. SYNDICATE BANK AND ORS [LAWS(ALL)-2006-5-390] [REFERRED]
BALDEV SINGH VS. GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY, AMRITSAR AND ANOTHER [LAWS(P&H)-2007-10-168] [REFERRED]
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK VS. CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT II, CHANDIGARH [LAWS(P&H)-2007-11-204] [REFERRED]
SI SURINDER SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2008-7-176] [REFERRED]
UNNIKRISHNAN VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(KER)-2017-4-70] [REFERRED TO]
G.P. SRIVASTAVA VS. DISTRICT JUDGE, ETAH [LAWS(ALL)-2017-3-112] [REFERRED TO]
SHRI ACHOM THAMBALNGOU SINGH VS. STATE OF MANIPUR [LAWS(MANIP)-2017-6-1] [REFERRED TO]
TAPAN KUMAR CHAKRAVARTI VS. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH GENERAL MANAGER N.E.RAILWAY GORAKHPUR [LAWS(ALL)-2018-1-24] [REFERRED TO]
A THANGAVELU VS. PRESIDING OFFICER [LAWS(MAD)-2018-1-323] [REFERRED TO]
RAMESH KUMAR MAHESHWARI VS. CENTRAL INSTITUTE OF PLASTICS ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY AND OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2018-4-127] [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDRA UPADHYAY VS. STATE OF U P AND OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2018-5-232] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. MEERA BAI & ORS [LAWS(MPH)-2018-4-76] [REFERRED TO]
VIJAY BAHADUR SINGH VS. STATE OF U P AND ORS [LAWS(ALL)-2017-4-371] [REFERRED TO]
R. SHANMUGAM VS. PRESIDING OFFICER AND OTHERS [LAWS(MAD)-2018-6-1181] [REFERRED TO]
MAHENDRA NATH VERMA VS. U.P. STATE PUBLIC SERVICES TRIBUNAL INDIRA BHAWAN LKO. [LAWS(ALL)-2018-9-152] [REFERRED TO]
NEERAJ KUMAR VS. STATE OF U. P. [LAWS(ALL)-2019-7-251] [REFERRED TO]
SIKANDER SINGH VS. PRESIDING OFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, LUDHIANA & ORS [LAWS(P&H)-2019-8-31] [REFERRED TO]
TH. HOPESON LAMKANG VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(MANIP)-2019-12-7] [REFERRED TO]
MARATHWADA SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL VS. SAWARUPSINGH ASARAM UMBARE [LAWS(BOM)-2020-12-381] [REFERRED TO]
RAHUL HIRAMAN BIRHADE VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(BOM)-2022-6-150] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Dr. AR. Lakshmanan, J. - (1.)The above appeal arises from the final judgment and order dated 13-12-2001 passed by the High Court of Rajasthan in Division Bench (Civil) Special Appeal No. 1073 of 2001 wherein the appeal filed by the State of Rajasthan was dismissed by the High Court by a non-speaking order.
(2.)The respondent-herein joined the services of the Government of Rajasthan in the Co-operative Department. He was promoted as UDC in March, 1965. He applied for 3 days leave while he was working as UDC. According to him, he became sick and could not attend the office for the period from 9-1-1978 to 19-1-1981. He was charge-sheeted under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal), Rules, 1958. The enquiry was held and the respondent attended the enquiry. It is his further case that he was not allowed to join duty even though he was marking his presence from 13-8-1984 to 23-8-1984. His services were terminated by way of publication in newspaper - Dainik Navjyoti dated 27-8-1984. He filed the appeal which was dismissed vide order dated 8-3-1988. It is also his case that notice which was sent to the respondent was deliberately sent on wrong address. Aggrieved against the orders dated 15-11-1984 and 8-3-1988, the respondent filed a writ petition in the High Court in the year 1991 i.e. after a gap of about 3 years.
(3.)Learned Single Judge of the High Court though endorses that the respondent did remain absent for about 3 years and that there was no satisfactory explanation to justify absence of 3 years still proceeded to reduce the punishment of removal into compulsory retirement with consequential retiral benefits. It is useful to reproduce the concluding portion of the order passed by the learned Single Judge which is as follows :
"However, it goes without saying that the Petitioner remained absent from about 3 years. He was asked time and again to join duties. There are hardly any medical certificates placed on record even if the enquiry would have been conducted in accordance with law after giving proper opportunity, the admitted fact of absence was borne out from the record and in such situation, in my opinion, even if the Petitioner would not have been present in the enquiry, it would not have made any difference at all as the Petitioner himself has admitted that he was absent for about three years for the period mentioned above though the only circumstances which he could have brought on record was his justification for remaining absent or producing the medical certificate which were in any case not attached with the leave applications and in such situation, he could have prayed for some lesser punishment.

Viewing all the aspects of the case and in the circumstances, in my opinion for the reason that he has put in already 18 years of service, a lesser punishment could have been imposed. It is a fit case where in view of the above circumstances, instead of reinstatement in service, the lesser punishment of compulsorily retiring the Petitioner can be passed and he can be retired as if he has qualified the minimum service to obtain retiral benefits which may be available to him. It is a fit case where in view of the above circumstances, the Petitioner can be deemed to have retired after seeking of service of 20 years with all retiral benefits, which may be available to him.

With the abovesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of."



Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.