- (1.) Heard counsel for the parties.
(2.) The petitioner in this writ application, has prayed for a direction upon the respondents to release the amounts of his salary which has been withheld with effect from 6.11.2002 to 01.03.2003.
(3.) As explained by the counsel for the parties, the petitioner being a constable, had proceeded on leave for eight days after obtaining permission from the competent authority. However, he overstayed the period of leave and joined much later after almost four months. Treating the same as an act of misconduct, an explanation was called for from the petitioner. In response, the petitioner explained that after proceeding on leave with the permission granted, he fell seriously ill and could not possibly resume duty immediately after expiry of the permitted period of leave. He had also submitted the medical certificate purportedly issued by the attending doctor. However, the Disciplinary Authority being not satisfied with the explanation offered, proceeded to inflict punishment by way of withholding of the petitioner's salary on the ground of 'No Work No Pay' for the aforementioned period. The petitioner filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority and taking a specific ground that for the similar acts of purported misconduct, other co-employees who had also absented by overstaying the period of leave granted to them for more than 80-85 days, have been exonerated for the lapses and no amount has been withheld for their overstayed period of their absence. The petitioner has also furnished the names of few of such co-employees to whom the benefits of exoneration is claimed to have been extended.;