Mohammad Rafiq, J. - (1.) This writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner, who was serving the Respondents as Headmistress. Petitioner was appointed with the Respondents on 3/11/1970. She worked with the Respondents continuously upto 13/5/1987 and beyond that period, it is contended by the Petitioner that she became so sick that she was unable to attend duties and she made number of applications duly supported by the medical certificates for grant of medical leave although those applications were received by the Respondents but they never conveyed about rejection of her leave nor otherwise conveyed sanction thereof. It is contended that Petitioner in this state of affair attained the age of superannuation of 58 years prevailing on 31/3/1999. She then prayed for settling her retiral dues but when nothing was done she filed this writ petition.
(2.) Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has argued that even if it was a case of absence of the Petitioner for a long time, Respondents could not have withheld retiral dues unless they in terms of Rule 86 of the RSR subjected her to regular departmental proceedings on charge of willful absence which although was not willful absence but was for reasons of her illness which was beyond her control. It is therefore contended that in terms of 256 (d) of the Rajasthan Service Rules 1951, Petitioner should be accorded proportionate pensionary benefits and also Gratuity etc.
(3.) Learned Counsel for the Respondents has opposed the writ petition and submitted that Petitioner has been willfully absenting from duty from 13/5/1987 and writ petition has also been filed belatedly in the year 2001. If her leave application was not accepted, there was no justification for her to have remained absent from duties. Learned Counsel referred to the notice served upon the Petitioner on 21/11/1990 (Ann.4) to report on duty but she did not submit reply there to.;