SHABIHUL HASNAIN,J. - (1.) HEARD Sri Manish Mehrotra learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the opposite parties. The petitioner was appointed on ad hoc basis against the temporary post of Junior Clerk by the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Lucknow Zone, Lucknow on 31.12.1983. Petitioner worked on the post continuously and her services were regularized on 3.1.1994 on the regular and permanent post of Assistant Senior Clerk by the competent authority. Petitioner was promoted on the post of Senior Clerk on 11.9.1989. Petitioner's work and conduct was found satisfactory throughout, her record was unblemished. She was never punished or placed under suspension for any misconduct. A 'Performance Report' dated 19.2.2000 given to the petitioner by her superiors has been annexed.
(2.) A tragic incident happened on 10.6.2000 in the life of petitioner through her husband. She was beaten up at her own house at D-524, Sector D, L.D.A. Colony, Kanpur Road, Police Station Krishna Nagar, Lucknow. He also turned her out of the house with the help of 'Gunda' elements. Although the petitioner was owner of the said house she became without roof on her head. This trauma left her mentally sick and in a state of shock. She was medically treated and advised bed rest. As such she could not attend the office or send proper information about her condition and reasons for her absence. She started living at different places because her husband was gunning for her. In such a situation it was very difficult for her to approach her place of employment. She filed a divorce petition No. 141 of 2001 in Family Court, Lucknow on the ground of physical and mental cruelty. The divorce petition was finally allowed on 8.12.2006. Unfortunately, on the other hand the services of the petitioner were also dispensed with due to her continued absence and non-information. Petitioner challenged the termination order by the instant writ petition. A counter affidavit has been filed to this petition. In the counter affidavit it has been mentioned that the services of the petitioner were terminated on 29.6.2004 after getting an opinion from the D.G.C. ( Civil) in view of the government orders and the rules.
(3.) THE case of the opposite parties is that the petitioner neither submitted medical report nor presented herself personally. Repeated letters sent by the office returned back because the petitioner was not available on the address given by her in her service record. It has been further submitted that the notices regarding her illegal absence were published on 13.12.2000, 28.6.2002 and 16.4.2004 respectively in the local newspapers. The petitioner send an application for extension of medical leave but since it was not accompanied with the medical prescriptions or medical certificates, the department had not taken any note of the same.;