Mukundakam Sharma, C.J.

1. The present appeal is filed by the appellant, being aggrieved by order dated 27th January, 2000 passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby the writ petition filed by the appellant was dismissed.

2. The appellant joined the respondent Authority on 19th October, 1977 as Assistant Engineer and was posted in Delhi. By order dated 20th December, 1982 the appellant was promoted to the post of Executive Engineer (Civil) but on ad hoc basis, in the pay scale of Rs. 1250-1700. On 4th March, 1987 while the appellant was working as Executive Engineer he was transferred to Madras by the respondent Authority. On 20th July, 1987 the appellant was directed to appear before the selection committee for interview for the purpose of regularising his service in the cadre of Executive Engineer (Civil) and, thereafter, on 4th November, 1987 the appellant was promoted as Executive Engineer on regular basis and placed on probation for a period of one year.

3. While the appellant was posted at Madras, in May, 1988 the appellant took 15 days leave commencing from 7th May, 1988 to 21st May, 1988 for the purpose of visiting his mother who was staying in Delhi. After coming to Delhi, the appellant applied for extension of the leave which request was rejected, but as the request was again made on the ground that the leave be granted and extended due to death of the appellant’s mother, leave was granted up to 18th June, 1988. Even after the expiry of the said extended leave period, the appellant did not report for duty and instead requested for another extension up to 4th July, 1988 on the ground that his son was sick. The said request was rejected and he was asked to join his duty immediately. The appellant instead of complying with the said direction, made another request for extension of leave up to 16th July, 1988, which was denied. Without paying any heed to the said rejection of leave, the appellant informed the respondent authority through telegram that due to unavoidable reasons he would be joining only on 1st August, 1988, which the appellant unilaterally further extended to 16th August, 1988 without any approval. In the meantime, a memo dated 2nd August, 1988 was issued to the appellant directing him to join duties by 5th August, 1988 as he had unauthorisedly remained absent since 19th June, 1988. It was clearly stated in the said memo that if the appellant did not join his duty by 5th August, 1988 an action would be contemplated against him according to the rules for such unauthorised absence.

4. As the appellant did not join by 5th August, 1988, a memo dated 14th September, 1988 was issued informing the appellant that the respondent Authority proposes to take action against him under Regulation 30 of IAAI Employees (Conduct, Discipline and Appeal) Regulations, 1987 and he was directed to submit his representation within 15 days of the receipt of the said memo. A response to the said memo was filed on 28th September, 1988. By office order dated 21st November, 1988 the appellant was reverted to his substantiative post of Assistant Engineer on the ground of unsatisfactory performance during the probation period and also on the ground of unauthorised absence from his place of posting. The competent authority, on consideration of the reply filed by the appellant to the memo dated 14th September, 1988, found the same unsatisfactory and by order dated 21st March, 1989 imposed the penalty of censure on the appellant stating that though the misconduct committed by the appellant was of a serious nature, but keeping in view the fact that the appellant had already been reverted to the post of Assistant Engineer due to his unsatisfactory performance during the period of probation, the competent authority had taken a lenient view and had ordered imposition of penalty of censure only.

5. Aggrieved by the aforesaid, the appellant challenged the orders dated 21st November, 1988 and 21st March, 1989 before the learned Singl