D.G.R.PATNAIK - (1.) PRAYER in this writ petition has been made for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing upon the respondents No.2 and 4 to accept the joining of the petitioner w.e.f 16.3.2007 and for a direction to pay the salary to the petitioner w.e.f. 1.4.2006 with interest @ 18% per annum and further a direction to the respondent No.2 to dispose of the representation dated 5.10.2007 filed by the petitioner within the stipulated time frame after giving an opportunity of hearing the petitioner.
(2.) THE petitioner was appointed on 16.7.2004 under the notification issued by the Vice -Chancellor, Birsa Agriculture University, Kanke, Ranchi on the post of Junior Scientist -cum -Assistant Professor (Soil Science) on the pay scale of Rs. 8000 -275 -135001 - with usual allowances and was posted under Zonal Research Station, Darisai under Birsa Agriculture University, which is situated in the district of Singhbhum East. The petitioner's joining was accepted initially on the vacant post of Farm Superintendent, Zonal Research Centre, Darisai and later, on the vacant post of Junior Scientist -cum -Assistant Professor from 10.9.2004. The petitioner's contention is that he continuously worked at Darisai and was duly paid salary till March 2006, and thereafter his salary has been stopped without assigning any reason whatsoever, though the petitioner had continuously worked till 13.9.2006. It is further explained that on 14.9.2006 the petitioner had applied for casual leave for two days which was permitted by the then Associate Director Research, Zonal Research Station, Birsa Agriculture University, Darisai. However, the petitioner could not resume his duties after tile period of two days casual leave on account of his illness and therefore, he posted a letter 17.9.2006 explaining reasons and praying for further medical leave on the ground that he had suffered from Slip Disc. During the period of his ailment, the petitioner forwarded a letter dated 22.1.2007 to his superior officer explaining the condition of his ailment and the advice of the doctor for complete bed rest. Ultimately, he recovered from his illness and submitted his joining letter before the respondent No.4 on 16.3.2007 along with the Medical Certificate issued by the Doctor. After the date of his joining the petitioner has been working regularly. However, on 12.4.2007 he was served a letter issued by the Respondent No. 4 asking him to submit his joining letter. In response, the petitioner gave a copy of the original joining letter on 12.4.2007 to respondent No.2. When he was again called for submission of joining letter, the petitioner again submitted a copy of his original joining letter dated 16.3.2007 along with the Medical Certificate on 25.4.2007. In spite of the repeated submissions of joining letter each time the petitioner was informed by the respondent No.4 that since he has not submitted his joining letter, it is deemed that he has absented from duty. The further contention of the petitioner is that though he has been continuously working and has been signing on the attendance register, his attendance has not been acknowledged. On the contrary a deliberate allegation has been leveled against him that he has absented from his duty willfully from 16.9.2006, and on such ground his prayer for casual leave for two days made on 21.9.2007 on the ground of daughter's illness, was also rejected. Learned counsel for the petitioner, while referring to Annexure -15 series of the writ petition, explains that the petitioner has been rendering his service and signing on the attendance register continuously, but with mala fide motive and intention the respondents have not been acknowledging the same and have taken the same ground for refusing payment of salary to the petitioner, which has been illegally stopped from 1.4.2006. Learned counsel for the petitioner explains further that pursuant to an interim order dated 1.5.2008 of this Court, whereby the respondents have been directed to pay the salary to the petitioner for the period he is working, the respondents have paid Rs. 20,0001 - (Rupees twenty thousand) only.
(3.) , Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents wherein a persistent statement has been made in several paragraphs that the petitioner is a habitual absentee and has not joined his duty for several months together. The learned counsel for the respondents explains that the petitioner has been paid his salary for the period he has served and has not been paid his salary for which period he has not served at all.;