AI Overview...
- Habitual Absenteeism - Several cases highlight that habitual absenteeism is a serious misconduct warranting disciplinary action, including termination. Courts have consistently held that persistent unauthorized absence reflects poor conduct and renders the employee unsuitable for continued service. For instance, in DEBI SAHAI VS STATE OF U. P. - Allahabad, the court noted the petitioner’s long-term unauthorized absences from 1976 to 1991, leading to his termination. Similarly, in D. Dundi Babu VS Central Administrative Tribunal - Andhra Pradesh, a railway employee’s habitual absenteeism for 321 days justified dismissal, emphasizing the gravity of such misconduct.
- Disciplinary Proceedings and Punishment - Authorities are justified in initiating disciplinary action against habitual absentees, especially when warnings and show-cause notices are issued. In Ranjanben J. Joshi VS State of Gujarat - Gujarat, the employee was repeatedly warned about his absenteeism, yet continued to remain absent without permission. The proportionality of punishment, such as dismissal, is upheld unless it appears shockingly disproportionate or biased (Government of India, Ministry of Communications & Information Technology, New Delhi & Others VS M. Jeyapal & Another - Madras).
- Legal Principles and Court Rulings - Courts have reinforced that habitual absenteeism undermines discipline and cannot be excused, even if the employee claims ignorance of rules (Ranjanben J. Joshi VS State of Gujarat - Gujarat). However, in some cases, courts have scrutinized whether the punishment was proportionate, and whether the absenteeism was truly habitual (Government of India, Ministry of Communications & Information Technology, New Delhi & Others VS M. Jeyapal & Another - Madras). It is also clarified that government employees do not have a right to voluntary retirement as a consequence of habitual absenteeism (Dashrathkumar Ambalal Brahmbhatt Thro' Poa VS Deputy Secretary to the Govt. of Gujarat Road & Building - Gujarat).
- Specific Cases - The service of Class IV employees, such as cooks or pump attendants, can be terminated based on habitual absenteeism, especially when supported by documented warnings and charge sheets (Shankar Ghosh VS State of Bihar - Patna, UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, NEW DELHI VS A. S. SHAJI - Kerala, [LAL CHAND SHEPHERD 1841
VS STATE OF U P - Allahabad](https://supremetoday.ai/doc/judgement/02500040304)). In contrast, courts have found that absence is not necessarily habitual if the employee can demonstrate good reasons or absence was not persistent (Government of India, Ministry of Communications & Information Technology, New Delhi & Others VS M. Jeyapal & Another - Madras).
Analysis and Conclusion:
Habitual absenteeism among Class VI employees is recognized as a serious misconduct justifying disciplinary action, including dismissal. While employers are within their rights to enforce discipline, courts emphasize that penalties should be proportionate and based on clear evidence of habituality. Repeated unauthorized absences, especially over long periods, undermine employee discipline and justify termination, provided due process is followed. However, claims of ignorance or extenuating circumstances may be considered, and the severity of punishment is scrutinized to prevent disproportionate sanctions.
References: - Shankar Ghosh VS State of Bihar - Patna, DEBI SAHAI VS STATE OF U. P. - Allahabad, Ranjanben J. Joshi VS State of Gujarat - Gujarat, D. Dundi Babu VS Central Administrative Tribunal - Andhra Pradesh, Management of Ponni Sugar Mills VS Presiding Officer, Labour Officer, Salem - Madras, UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, NEW DELHI VS A. S. SHAJI - Kerala, Dashrathkumar Ambalal Brahmbhatt Thro' Poa VS Deputy Secretary to the Govt. of Gujarat Road & Building - Gujarat, V. Thangaraj VS The Vice Chancellor & Others - Madras, [LAL CHAND SHEPHERD 1841
VS STATE OF U P - Allahabad](https://supremetoday.ai/doc/judgement/02500040304), Government of India, Ministry of Communications & Information Technology, New Delhi & Others VS M. Jeyapal & Another - Madras
Search Results for "Class Vi Employee Habitual Absentee"
2022 0 Supreme(Pat) 662 • India - Patna
P. B. BAJANTHRI, PURNENDU SINGH
Service Law – Dismissal – From Bihar Military Police for unauthorised absence from duty – Sympathy cannot be extended to a habitual ... No doubt, sympathy cannot be extended to a habitual absentee at the same time we interfere with the quantum of penalty only on the score that appellant was only a Cook and he is a Group-D employee and it is not a case of misappropriation of Government fund or heinous charge has been framed against him ... Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents resisted the aforesaid contentions ....
2002 0 Supreme(All) 12 • India - Allahabad
SUNIL AMBWANI
Fact of the Case: The petitioner, a temporary employee, challenged the termination of his services under the U. ... Finding of the Court: The court found that the termination was based on the petitioner's general unsuitability due to habitual ... He was of habitual absentee from work and used to remain on unauthorised leave for long periods. The charge-sheet given to the petitioner relates to the periods from 1976 to 1991. Explanation was called for from him on about 22 occasions between 1976 and 1991. ... The petitio....
2014 0 Supreme(Guj) 773 • India - Gujarat
C.L.SONI
He has also pleaded ignorance of rules being a Class IV employee. ... He was given show-cause notice vide this Directorate letter No. 7062/State Estt/JHJ dated 11 May, 90 asking to reply within ten days as to why disciplinary action should not be taken against him and also why his service should not be terminated for being habitual absentee. ... N.C.C., Surendranagar is a habitual defaulter and remained absent without prior permission from the superior authority. Shri J.H. ... Even otherwise, in the cas....
2023 0 Supreme(AP) 1436 • India - Andhra Pradesh
RAVI NATH TILHARI, B. V. L. N. CHAKRAVARTHI
(Conduct) Rules, 1966 - Summary Fact of the Case: The deceased applicant, a railway employee ... Learned Central Government counsel for the respondents submits that the applicant was habitual absentee on different occasions during the charged period in total of 321 days, as is evident from the charge memo. ... ii) If the answer to the 1st question is in affirmative, whether the punishment of removal from service after 16 years of service on such ground to the Class-IV employee is shockingly disproporti....
2019 0 Supreme(Mad) 3111 • India - Madras
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
the writ petitioner company with effect, as an unskilled worker – He was working as Pump Attendant – 2nd respondent was a chronic absentee ... Limited – Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner Management made a submission that the 2nd respondent was employed ... several memos and charge sheet, which resulted in various warning letters to the 2nd respondent workman – During the 2nd respondent absented ... Even on merits, it is contended that the 2nd respondent was a habitual absentee#HL....
2016 0 Supreme(Ker) 544 • India - Kerala
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU
amounts to voluntarily abandonment of Service - Long term absence - Held, employee, here, is a casual employee, though working for ... his ways; but he remained unreformed; and finally the employer warned the employee of the consequences. ... Service Law - Discretionary action of employer - Illegal absence from duty - Misconduct of Service - Whether ... According to him, the respondent is a habitual absentee. He has laid specific emphasis that the employee's first bou....
2019 0 Supreme(Guj) 167 • India - Gujarat
A.S.SUPEHIA
It is no more res integra that a government employee cannot claim voluntary retirement as a matter of right on the ground that he ... It is no more res integra that a government employee cannot claim voluntary retirement as a matter of right on the ground that he ... Learned counsel for the respondent has endeavoured hard to impress upon us that he had not been a habitual absentee. We really fail to fathom the said submission when the respondent had remained absent for almost one year and seven months. ... Indisputably, ....
2009 0 Supreme(Mad) 416 • India - Madras
K.CHANDRU
Fact of the Case: The petitioner, an employee of Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, was removed from service due to ... The police force is a disciplined force and if the respondent is a habitual absentee then there is no reason to ignore this fact at the time of imposing penalty. ... In such a situation, if the employee has entangled himself into further commitments abroad, he has to blame himself. ... No employer running a fleet of buses can allow an employee to remain absent for ....
2004 0 Supreme(All) 356 • India - Allahabad
SUNIL AMBWANI
The termination was based on unsatisfactory conduct and habitual absconding from duties. ... The regularisation of services under the rules is to be made by a Selection Committee which has to consider eligibility and suitability of the employee. The petitioner was a regular absentee, and was thus wholly unsuitable for the job. ... The petitioner had been habitual of absconding from his duties on his sweet will, and availing wilful leave without giving any intimation or obtaining prior sanction. ... The petitioner Lal Cha....
2008 0 Supreme(Mad) 125 • India - Madras
ELIPE DHARMA RAO, S.R.SINGHARAVELU
Finding of the Court: The court found that the respondent's absence was not habitual and no bad antecedents were brought ... proportionality of punishment, bias of disciplinary authority Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the respondent's absence was not habitual ... In the above case, the employee was a habitual absentee, which was viewed very serious by the Honourable Apex Court. As has been observed by the Honourable Apex Court in the above judgment itself, there cannot be any sweeping generaliza....
Filter by Legal Phrase
