- (1.) SINCE there is delay of 198 days in refiling the instant appeal, an application under Section 151 CPC has been filed seeking condonation of said delay, duly accompanied by an affidavit of the the plaintiff/appellant.
(2.) FOR the reasons stated in the application, duly supported by the affidavit, there exist sufficient grounds to condone the said delay. Hence the application is allowed and delay in refiling the appeal is allowed. Plaintiff is in second appeal directed against the appellate judgment and decree dated 6.4.2010 passed by the learned District Judge, Rohtak whereby the appeal filed by the plaintiff has been accepted and the suit decreed by setting aside the impugned order of dismissal of his service in disciplinary proceedings, however, with a liberty to the Governor to pass appropriate fresh orders, if any, and; further challenge is to the judgment and decree dated 23.7.2009 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) Rohtak whereby the suit of the plaintiff/appellant was dismissed. Facts in brief are that plaintiff was appointed as a Lecturer on 30.4.1990 in the Department of Psychiatry in Medical College, Rohtak now Pt.B.D.Sharma PGIMS Rohtak. He was charge sheeted under Rule 7 of the Punishment and Appeal Rules,1987 vide memo dated 20.12.1994 for major penalty due to his willful absence from duty without any reasonable cause w.e.f. 10.5.1994 and indulging in private practice in violation of Clause 19(1) of Haryana Medical Education Service Rules. After enquiry, show cause notice was issued to the plaintiff vide letter dated 21.2.1997 alongwith a copy of enquiry report proposing penalty of dismissal from service. The plaintiff instead of filing his reply to the show cause notice wrote a letter dated 15.4.1997 alleging non-supply of enquiry report. The disciplinary proceedings culminated into passing of punishment order dated 25/27.7.1997. The plaintiff filed civil suit on 30.9.1998 challenging the punishment of dismissal from service. The learned trial court on the RSA No.253/2011(O&M) 3 basis of evidence adduced, upheld the order of dismissal and dismissed the suit vide judgment and decree dated 23.7.2009. Aggrieved against the same, plaintiff filed appeal and the learned appellate court while affirming the findings in respect of validity of the enquiry proceedings set aside the order of dismissal on the jurisdictional power of the Commissioner to pass such an order with further liberty to Governor i.e. the competent authority to pass a fresh order as it deems fit.
(3.) AT the time of arguments learned counsel for the plaintiff/ appellant submits that the competent authority i.e. Governor of Haryana has passed a fresh order of termination of the services of the appellant and therefore, prays for withdrawal of the appeal to challenge the order, if so advised, in accordance with law. Dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty aforesaid. 11.05.2012.;