SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(All) 61

D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, RAJAN ROY
SATYA NARAIN TRIPATHI (3633 (S/S) 2012) – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
Chandra Bhushan Pandey for the Appellant; C.S.C. for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

By the Court.—The special appeal has arisen from a judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 17 December 2015, dismissing a writ petition filed by the appellant. The relief which the appellant sought, apart from challenging the departmental orders denying his claim of retiral dues, was a mandamus for the payment of arrears of salary, pensionary benefits, gratuity and general provident fund by calculating it upto the date of his superannuation on 31 July 1993. Interest was also claimed. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition holding that the appellant was habitual in remaining absent from duty unauthorizedly and his absence would be treated as an abandonment of service. The petition has, accordingly, been dismissed.

2. The appellant was appointed on 14 October 1961 on a substantive basis on the post of Village Level Worker (now re-designated as Gram Vikas Adhikari). He was confirmed in service on 16 February 1972. The case of the appellant is that in September 1979, when he was posted at development block Bhathat in district Gorakhpur, he proceeded on four days casual leave by submitting an application on 21 September 1979. The appellant was diagnose




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top