Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
J.J. MUNIR, J.
Vibhushit Singh – Petitioner
Versus
National Thermal Power Corporation Limited and Others – Respondents
Writ (A) No. 9538 of 2023
Decided On : 19-10-2023
abandonment - employment - Rule 24.9 of the National Thermal Power Corporation Service Rules, Rule 26(2)(vi)(e) of the Conduct, Discipline and Appeal Rules, 1977 - The court discussed the conditions for abandonment of service under Rule 24.9 of the NTPC Rules and the strict interpretation of the rule in favor of the employee. The court emphasized that the rule can only be invoked if the conditions are strictly satisfied, including unauthorized absence for a consecutive period of 90 days without sanctioned leave or not reporting for duty after the expiry of sanctioned leave. The court held that the petitioner's actions did not fulfill these conditions and therefore, the decision by the respondents to consider the petitioner’s services as abandoned was quashed.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, an employee of the National Thermal Power Corporation, was granted study leave for two years to pursue a Master of Technology course. However, he was not able to complete the course and reported back to duty within the sanctioned leave period. The respondents treated the period of leave as unauthorized absence and declared the petitioner to have abandoned service.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's actions did not fulfill the conditions for abandonment of service under Rule 24.9 of the NTPC Rules. The court quashed the decision by the respondents to consider the petitioner’s services as abandoned and issued a mandamus to reinstate the petitioner with seniority and continuity of service.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner's unreported abandonment of the course of study during sanctioned leave entitled the employer to treat the period of leave as unauthorized absence and abandonment of service.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the strict interpretation of Rule 24.9 of the NTPC Rules in favor of the employee, highlighting the conditions for abandonment of service and the need for strict compliance with the rule. The court held that the petitioner's actions did not fulfill the conditions for abandonment of service and therefore, the decision by the respondents to consider the petitioner’s services as abandoned was quashed.
Final Decision: The court quashed the decision by the respondents to consider the petitioner’s services as abandoned and issued a mandamus to reinstate the petitioner with seniority and continuity of service.
JUDGMENT :
J.J. MUNIR, J.
Does the unreported abandonment of a course of study by an employee, who was sanctioned study leave for a specified period of time, entitle the employer to treat the period of sanctioned leave unauthorized absence from duty, leading to abandonment of service?
1. This question has arisen in the context of Rule 24.9 of the National Thermal Power Corporation Service Rules read with Rule 26(2)(vi)(e) of the Conduct, Discipline and Appeal Rules, 1977 applicable to the National Thermal Power Corporation [‘NTPC’ for short]. How the above referred question has arisen would shortly appear from facts giving rise to this writ petition.
2. The NTPC is a public sector undertaking of the Central Government. It is incorporated as a public limited company. According to the petitioner, it is classified as a “Maharatna” central public sector undertaking, possessing a certain degree of financial freedom. One of the projects of the NTPC is Rihand Super Thermal Power Project, Rihand Nagar, District Sonbhadra. The petitioner applied for consideration of his candidature in the recruitment of Executive Trainee (ET-2012). He participated in the various stages of selection and finally stood selected. In consequence of the selection, an offer of appointment dated 13.07.2012 was made by the Manager, Human Resource Centre of the NTPC. If accepted by the petitioner, the offer required him to undergo the formalities specified. The petitioner completed those formalities in response to the offer of appointment dated 13.07.2012 on the 21st of August, 2012. The Manager, Human Resource Centre issued a letter of appointment dated 21st August, 2012, saying that subject to the petitioner successfully completing the training, he would be posted to one of the projects/stations of the NTPC, based on his performance during training, assessed periodically. The petitioner, it goes without saying, completed the training successfully and was posted at the Rihand Super Thermal Power Project, Rihand Nagar, Sonbhadra.
3. After serving the NTPC for some years, the petitioner secured admission to the Master of Technology [‘M.Tech’ for short] Course. He then applied for sanction of study leave for a period of two years in order to enable him to pursue the full-time course of M.Tech. at the Krishna Institute of Engineering and Technology [‘KIET’ for short] Ghaziabad. The petitioner’s application was considered and sanctioned vide an order dated 17.06.2017, issued by the Senior Manager, Human Resource. He was sanctioned study leave from 19.06.2017 to 18.06.2019. The study leave was sanctioned on condition that the petitioner would not be entitled to any pay or allowances during the period of leave. The conditions carried in the order dated 17.06.2017, sanctioning study leave to the petitioner, read:
(ii) He will not be entitled to any pay or allowances during the period of study leave and he will not accept any part/full time employment, scholarship, honorarium or any other payment during this period without prior approval of the Competent Authority.
(iii) He will be entitled to the benefits of the continuity of service for CPF and Gratuity and if he chooses to contribute to his provident fund account during study leave period the Company will make a matching contribution as per rules framed from time to time.
(iv) During the study leave period, he shall not be considered for promotion. However, the period will count for eligibility for promotion only if he successfully completes his study. He will be considered for promotion as per the Company policy after rejoining duties on expiry of study leave. The duration of Study Leave availed without completing the study will not be reckoned for purpose of eligibility for promotion or for earning increments. He will also not be
There is absolutely no requirement for the Corporation, where it treats an employee to have resigned his post under sub-Rule 13.3 of Rule 40 of the Services Rules, to pass an order terminating his se....
Point of Law : Upholding the validity of the action of the Bank in applying the clause 16 of the bipartite statement by noticing the employee and not holding regular departmental enquiry, the positio....
Terminate from service - Unauthorisedly absent from duty - Rule 18 of Financial Handbook held that there cannot be any automatic termination of services of employee, in case of absence from duty, sam....
Absence from duty for an extended period can amount to voluntary abandonment of service, negating the need for disciplinary actions prior to termination.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that unauthorized absence from duties constitutes misconduct, and the disciplinary authority is empowered to impose punishment based on fair discip....
Long absence from service without proper intimation or correspondence can amount to abandonment of service, leading to automatic termination of employment.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
