TMI Blog2006 (2) TMI 674X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rk on account of illness. By a memorandum dated 16-2-1989/17-2-1989 the appellant was considered as being unauthorisedly absent from duty and was extended the courtesy of the said memorandum served by home delivery. As a consequence, the appellant was issued a warning on 2-3-1989 warning him to abstain from taking leave frequently and advising him that he should get over the habit of taking leave frequently in future because of which office work suffered. He was also warned that otherwise disciplinary action would be taken. As expected, the appellant made a representation against the said warning but his representation came to be ignored. On 6-7-1989 the appellant was transferred by an order from the headquarters at New Delhi to Subsidia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tantiated'. In coming to this conclusion, the enquiry officer also noticed that the appellant had been sanctioned earned leave for 10-7-1989 and 11-7-1989 and he did not agree with the appellant's arguments that he was so serious that he could not even go to Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital, New Delhi for medical examination as directed by the competent authority. The enquiry officer specifically noticed that the appellant was fit enough to go to his own doctors and produced certificates, but was unwilling to produce a certificate from Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital about his having been ill and having become fit enough to resume duty. The medical certificate issued by Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital stated that the appellant had mini ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us hoping for better luck. We have perused the record with the help of the learned counsel and heard the learned counsel very patiently. We find that no case for our interference whatsoever has been made out. In the first place, a government servant cannot disobey a transfer order by not reporting at the place of posting and then go to a court to ventilate his grievances. It is his duty to first report for work where he is transferred and make a representation as to what may be his personal problems. This tendency of not reporting at the place of posting and indulging in litigation needs to be curbed. Apart therefrom, if the appellant really had some genuine difficulty in reporting for work at Tezpur, he could have reported for duty at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y authority noticed it. This is not a situation where the disciplinary authority was disagreeing with the findings of the enquiry officer, which would have required following of some procedure prescribed under the Rules. On the contrary, barring five days between 7-7-1989 to 11-7-1989, during the rest of the period the appellant was absent unauthorisedly, and the enquiry officer and the disciplinary authority were in agreement thereupon. ( 6. ) A final, if we may say so, desperate argument was made that the appellant had sufficient leave to his credit and, therefore, the respondents should have taken a liberal view in the matter and permitted him to resume duty when he attempted to resume in the year 1992 by sanctioning the leave that wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
