A disciplinary authority must establish willfulness in unauthorized absence; absence due to compelling circumstances cannot be treated as misconduct.

ORDER

Hon’ble Mr. Sanjeeva Kumar, Member (A):

By way of this OA filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicant has sought the following relief(s) :-

“8.1 To direct to quash and set aside the order dated 11.01.2017.

8.2 To direct the respondents to Quash and set aside order dated 05.07.2016 along with the Findings.

8.3 Pass any other orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”

2. The applicant is aggrieved by the alleged arbitrary and illegal act of the respondents by initiating disciplinary inquiry against him. The respondents initiated D.E against the applicant vide order dated 02.03.2015. It is further submitted that the applicant was not intimated about initiating D.E proceedings against the applicant. The respondents in unjustified manner initiated D.E and went ahead with the proceedings without giving applicant any chance/ opportunity for explanation why applicant was absenting himself from the duty. The respondents without going into the merits of the case passed an order wherein harsh punishment of dismissal from the service was given to the applicant.

3. It is submitted that the respondents did not serve the notices for joining the duty at his residence where the applicant was residing but served the notices to his ailing and illiterate mother at this home town Patna (Bihar). The applicant because of his martial dispute and baseless complaints filed his wife took a toll on applicant's mental health was not keeping well and he was going through a medical treatment which exhausted him financially, mentally and physically. Because of the complaint, the applicant was harassed by the way of series of transfers from one place to another within a period of 1 year.

4. It is further submitted that the applicant was appearing in all the pending complaints CAW Cell, Nanak Puri and a D.V act case in Tis Hazari Court with intimation to the department. The summons and notices were being served to the applicant's present address and even the contact no. of the applicant is same where the concerned officials intimated the applicant about the summons and notices.

5. It is averred that applicant’s salary was also withheld during the medical rest period which caused further hardships to the applicant and was unable to pay family maintenance hence the Family Court passed adverse orders and when report was called for by the Family Court a false report was given by the respondents that stoppage of pay was because of unauthorized absence but at that particular period applicant had sanctioned leave for his medical treatment. It is stated the after the expiry of the leave the applicant intimated the respondents that he is not keeping well and further wants extension of leave for his medical treatment which was denied and the applicant even appeared before the second medical examination before Superintendent DDU hospital, Delhi whereas in the later part of the order the respondents alleged that the applicant did not turn up before Superintendent Medical litter & DDU hospital, Delhi.

6. It is contended that the utter shock and surprise of the applicant on 23.03.2016 appeared before the Family Court where the court informed about the dismissal of the applicant and the maintenance amount will be paid from his GPF. The respondents maliciously passed the dismissal order without intimating the applicant. The applicant filed an appeal before the appellate authority against the harsh punishment of dismissal and the