JUDGMENT

1. The matter has been taken up for hearing online because of COVID-19 pandemic restrictions.

2. It is the petitioner's case, as pleaded in the writ application, that he was appointed in Bihar Health Service in 1988. By an order dated 29.06.2002, he was posted at Primary Health Centre, Rohtas. The said place of posting, according to the petitioner, was immensely disturbed those days, when the doctors were threatened to pay ransom else they would be killed. He, admittedly, did not join his place of posting. According to him, he was depressed and had fallen sick. His father also went in depression, which were the additional reasons why he could not join his place of posting. Nearly one and half years thereafter, he filed a representation before the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Rohtas at Sasaram making a request to transfer him to a different place. After considering his physical condition and that of his father the petitioner was deputed at Bhemkarup in Nasriganj Block. A copy of the order dated 16.12.2003 has been annexed as Annexure-1 to this application, from which it appears that the Civil Surgeon, while deputing the petitioner to additional Primary Health Centre, Bhemkarup, directed the Incharge Medical Officer, Nasriganj to ensure payment of his salary and emoluments on the basis of attendance details.

3. Considering the adverse situation, the Civil Surgeon stayed the earlier order of the petitioner's transfer and sanctioned payment of salary for the period during which he had remained absent. It was also mentioned in the said order dated 16.12.2003 that the petitioner shall take necessary steps for sanction of leave for the period during which he had remained absent from duty with supporting documents. Soon thereafter, a new incumbent joined as Civil Surgeon and cancelled the petitioner's deputation at Additional Primary Health Centre, Bhemkarup and asked the petitioner to join at Rohtas PHC. The petitioner was relieved on 28.02.2004 by the Incharge Medical Officer, PHC, Nasriganj, accordingly, for him to join at Rohtas PHC.

4. The petitioner, thereafter, represented to Respondent No. 4 stating that he was unwell and was undergoing treatment at Apolo Hospital, New Delhi and was advised to undergo various tests. His wife had also developed glaucoma and was suspected of breast cancer and accordingly he requested the Civil Surgeon to grant him leave by an application, which has been brought on record by way of Annexure-3 to this application. The said representation, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure-3 to this application, does not bear any date.

5. As the petitioner did not join the place of his posting, a departmental proceeding was proposed to be initiated against him.

6. The petitioner has stated in the writ application that a Division Bench of this Court had also taken cognizance of the then prevailing situation in the State of Bihar and had proceeded against the Government officials to provide adequate security to the doctors.

7. On 08.03.2006, the Regional Deputy Director, Health Services, Patna came out with a notice directing the petitioner to join the respective place of his posting within 15 days. The petitioner again represented through his letter dated 21.03.2006, which has been brought on record by way of Annexure-5 to this application, asserting that there was threat to his life and, therefore, he could not join Rohtas PHC. The said representation at Annexure-5 is also undated.

8. Since the petitioner did not join, a departmental proceeding was initiated against him with the issuance of charge-sheet on 15.03.2007. The Enquiring Authority submitted his report on 11.12.2009, holding the charge against the petitioner of having remained absent unauthorisedly proved. The inquiry report was supplied to the petitioner for seeking his response through letter dated 30.03.2012. The petitioner is said to have submitted his reply on 04.06.2013. In the meanwhile, by a fresh resolution dated 26.04.201