- (1.) By means of the present writ petition under Article 226/ 227 of the Constitution of India, the State of U.P. through Secretary, Swasthya Vibhag, U.P. Lucknow and other concerned officials of the Chikitsha Evam Parivar Kalyan Vibhag have challenged the order dated 9.6.2004 passed by the State Public Services Tribunal, Indira Bhawan, Lucknow, wherein Claim Petition No. 2382 of 1994 filed by the respondent No. 2 herein, has been allowed and the State has been directed to pay the salary and other service benefits to the respondent No. 2 herein from 1.8.1989 and onwards and it was left open to the authorities to take appropriate action regarding unauthorized absence from 5.2.89 till 31.7.1989. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present petition are as follows: The respondent No. 2 was working as Staff Nurse at Maharani Laxmibai Medical College, Jhansi. She was on sanctioned leave up to 4.2.1989. On account of unavoidable circumstances she could not join her duty till 31.7.1989. She reported for joining on 1.8.1989. The authorities did not permit her to resume her duty and did not allow her to work. Faced with this situation, the respondent No. 2 filed a claim petition under Section 4 of the U.P. Public Services (Tribunal) Act, 1976 claiming of salary and other benefits for the period from 29.1.1989 to 2.2.1989 alongwith interest. The Tribunal after considering the claim and the averments made in the written statement, filed by the State Authorities was not satisfied with the stand of the petitioners in not permitting her to resume her duty on 1.8.1989 when she had reported for duty, and further no disciplinary proceeding, which could have been taken, was taken against her.
(2.) We have heard learned Standing Counsel for the petitioners and Sri Amit Kumar Singh appearing for the contesting respondent. The learned Standing Counsel submitted that as respondent No. 2 was on unauthorized leave and was absent from her duty for a considerable period of five months, the authorities were justified in not allowing her to join the duty without taking necessary direction from the higher authorities. The Tribunal is not justified to allowing the claim petition. It is not disputed that respondent No. 2 was working as Staff Nurse at Maharani Laxmibai Medical College, Jhansi. Her nature of appointment was either permanent or temporary but it is not the case of the petitioners that she was appointed on Daily wage. That being the position the authorities were not at all justified to refuse her to resume duty when she reported for duty. It is always open to the authorities to take disciplinary proceedings for unauthorized absence from duty. In this view of the matter, the order passed by the Tribunal does not call for interference. The writ petition fails and is dismissed. The entire amount in terms of the order passed by the Tribunal shall be paid to the respondent No. 2 within one month from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before petitioner No. 2.;