S.K.GANGELE
Mahesh Kumar Shrivastava – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent
Gangele, J. -- 1. Petitioner has filed this petition challenging the order Annexure P-l dated 8.1.2004. By the aforesaid order the period of absence of the petitioner from 24.11.2002 to 21.7.2003 total period of 240 days have been declared as dies non.
2. As per the petitioner when he was working as Manager in District Commerce and Industries Centre, Morena (M.P.) a show cause notice was issued to him mentioning the facts that he was absent from duty w.e.f. 24.11.2002 to 21.7.2003 near about 240 days and he did not submit any application for the aforesaid period of absence, hence, why the aforesaid period be not treated as dies non.
3. Earlier, the petitioner did not receive salary for certain period for the year of 2003. He filed a petition before this Court which was registered as WP No. 622/03 and this Court disposed of the petition with a direction to the respondents to pay the salary of the petitioner or assign reasons for non-payment of salary. Thereafter, the aforesaid show cause notice was issued to the petitioner. The petitioner submitted his reply. He specifically mentioned that he was present on duty from 24.11.2002 to 21.7.2003. He further submitted that he was worki
3. Battilal v. Union of India and others = [2005 (3) MPHT 32 (DB)]
4. Dr. Anil Kumar Varma v. State of Madhya Pradesh and others reported in = [2005 (1) MPHT 24 (NOC)]
1. Battilal v. Union of India and others = [2005 (II) MPWN 51
2. Dr. Anil Kumar Varma v. State of Madhya Pradesh and others = [2005 (1) MPHT 24 (NOC)]
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.