Mohammad Rafiq, J. - (1.) PETITIONER has approached this court against the order (Annexure -7) passed in January, 2014, whereby his contractual services on the post of Junior Technical Assistant in the office of Development Officer cum Programme Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Nainwa, District Bundi, have been terminated.
(2.) CONTENTION of learned counsel for petitioner is that the petitioner was appointed as Junior Technical Assistant in Panchayat Samiti, Nainwa, District Bundi, with effect from 29.01.2011. It is contended that the respondents have terminated the services of the petitioner on the alleged basis of willful absence, whereas the absence of the petitioner was not willful and he remained absent from duty due to bona -fide reason. Petitioner submitted his reply on 20.12.2013 to show -cause notice dated 12.12.2013 for alleged absence from 01.09.2013 till issuance of that notice. He also reported on duty on the same day i.e. 20.12.2013. Thereafter on 25.12.2013 he submitted another reply to respondent no. 3 - the Chief Executive cum Additional District Programme Coordinator (MNEREGA), Zila Parishad Bundi, District Bundi, along -with which he enclosed documents to show that his wife has been suffering from some ailment and that petitioner had to take her to Agarwal Neuro Psychiatric Centre, Kota on 01.09.2013. She has problem of hyper tension also. Doctor has advised her for rest and also advised the petitioner that he should stand by her side. The petitioner submitted application for grant of casual leave on 01.09.2013, but the leave application has not been taken on record. He again took her wife to the doctor on 30.09.2013 which is proved for the doctor's slip itself. Thereafter the petitioner took her wife to the doctor on 01.11.2013 and 07.12.2013 and since then her wife is under treatment. The absence of the petitioner is thus not willful. Perusal of the impugned show cause notice dated 12.12.2013 indicates that as per the terms of the agreement the services of the petitioner are liable to be terminated if he remains absent from duty for more than seven days. The petitioner remained absent from 01.09.2013 and as per his own showing he reported on duty on 20.12.2013. In fact in the reply dated 220.12.2013 to first show cause -notice he has simply stated that he remained absent due to unavoidable family circumstances but no reason whatsoever was ever assigned therein, but subsequently when the Development Officer forwarded his case to the Chief Executive officer saying that despite repeated notice, the petitioner has not appeared nor has given any satisfactory reply and after more than three months he has appeared to attend on 20.12.2013, petitioner submitted one more representation to the chief Executive Officer, who, only after considering the same passed the impugned order (Annexure -7) in January, 2014. The explanation given by the petitioner cannot be said to be satisfactory and that willful absence for more than three months amounts to breach of condition of the agreement.
(3.) IN view of the nature of appointment of the petitioner and especially the stipulation that if he remains absent for more than seven days his service can be terminated, the action of the respondents cannot be said to be without justification.;