IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANAND PATHAK &

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DWARKA DHISH BANSAL ON THE 21^st OF JANUARY, 2026 WRIT APPEAL NO. 145 of 2026 THE STATE OF M.P. & ORS.

Vs.

DEEPAK KUMAR CHAUHAN ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

APPEARANCE:

Shri Ankur Mody – Additional Advocate General and Shri S.S.

Kushwaha – Government Advocate for the appellants/State.

Shri B.P. Singh – Advocate for the respondent.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ORDER

Per: Justice Anand Pathak

1. Heard on I.A.464/2026, an application under Section 5 of Limitation Act seeking condonation of 29 days' delay in preferring the present appeal.

2. Learned counsel for the State submits that after passing the impugned order, opinion to file writ appeal was sought from the Advocate General's Office which was granted on 10-10-2025 and thereafter matter was proceeded with for obtaining permission to file writ appeal and as soon as permission was granted, the present appeal has been preferred by the appellants. It is further submitted that in procedural inertia, some delay occurred in filing the present appeal, which is based on bona fide reasons, therefore, same be condoned.

3. Learned counsel for the respondent opposed the submission and prayed for dismissal of application for condonation of delay.

4. On due consideration and the reasons contained in the application, the same is allowed. Delay in preferring the present appeal is condoned.

5. Matter is heard on merits.

6. The present appeal under Section 2 (1) of the Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 is preferred by the appellants/State being crestfallen by the order dated 15-09-2025 passed by learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.26413 of 2018 whereby the writ petition filed by the respondent (hereinafter referred to as “the petitioner”) has been allowed.

7. Precisely stated facts of the case are that petitioner was appointed on

22-01-1991 as Enumerator in the respondents department. Due to ailment, petitioner proceeded on leave by moving an application dated 23-09-2009 of three days and thereafter since he could not recover and advised complete bet rest therefore, he extended his leave and informed about the same to the department but department did not consider the same. Thereafter without issuing any charge- sheet and holding any departmental enquiry, impugned dismissal order dated 21-10-2011 has been passed by Director, Veterinary Services, Gwalior. Besides that, earlier also petitioner remained on leave w.e.f 28-11-2007 to 09-03-2008 for 104 days for which he was punished with stoppage of two increments without cumulative effect.

8. Petitioner challenged his termination order dated 21-10-2011 by way of preferring writ petition No.2354/2012 which was disposed of vide order dated 02-04-2012, directing the petitioner to prefer appeal before competent authority. Petitioner availed the said remedy but met with the same fate vide order dated 29-08-2018 whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed. Therefore, petitioner is before this Court.

9. It is the submission of learned counsel for appellants that petitioner is habitual of absentism, earlier also for 104 days he remained absent without getting his leave application sanctioned from the authority for which he was punished with stopping of two increments with cumulative effect. Thereafter, again on 23-09-2009 he proceeded on leave for three days but did not turn up for almost two years, therefore, under compelled circumstances his services were terminated. Prior to terminating the services of petitioner, he was given several notices for joining the duties but he did not choose to reply the same, therefore, treating the case petitioner as abandonment of service, his services were terminated. Reliance has been placed over the judgment