Present : Mr. Girish Agnihotri Senior Advocate with Vs. State of Punjab and Others - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1070927
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnMar-26-2013
AppellantPresent : Mr. Girish Agnihotri Senior Advocate with
RespondentState of Punjab and Others
Excerpt:
in the high court of punjab & haryana at chandigarh lpa no.282 of 2013 (o&m) date of decision:26. 03.2013 kulbhushan singh ...appellant versus state of punjab and others ..respondents. coram: hon'ble mr.justice a.k.sikri, chief justice. hon'ble mr.justice rakesh kumar jain. present : mr.girish agnihotri, senior advocate with mr.vijay pal, advocate, for the appellant. **** a.k.sikri c.j.(oral) cm no.751 of 2013 heard. for the reasons mentioned in the application, delay of 15 days in re-filing the present appeal is condoned. c.m.stands disposed of. lpa no.282 of 2013 (o&m) the appellant had absented himself from duty w.e.f.20.03.2009 till the date of passing of the order dated 27.08.2009 when his services were terminated. the appellant challenged his termination on the ground that no show-cause notice was given or enquiry held against him. the learned single judge has proceeded on the basis that the absence from service w.e.f.20.03.2009 till 27.08.2009 was not disputed and therefore such a case did not call for any interference. however, it is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant infact performed duties during this period and was not absent for the entire period as stated and had a chance to explain been given to the appellant by holding an enquiry, he would have done so. this submission is made on the basis of some additional documents filed not lpa no.282 of 2013 (o&m) [2].alongwith the appeal. because of this reason, the learned senior counsel submits that the appellant be permitted to withdraw the present appeal with liberty to file appeal against the impugned order before the appellate authority based upon the aforesaid documents. liberty granted. the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. needless to mention that when such an appeal is preferred by the appellant before the appellate authority, the appellate authority shall apply its own mind without influenced by the observations made by the learned single judge in the impugned order. (a.k.sikri) chief justice 26 03.2013 (rakesh kumar jain) 'ravinder' judge
Judgment:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LPA No.282 of 2013 (O&M) Date of Decision:

26. 03.2013 Kulbhushan Singh ...Appellant Versus State of Punjab and others ..Respondents.

CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI, CHIEF JUSTICE.

HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN.

Present : Mr.Girish Agnihotri, Senior Advocate with Mr.Vijay Pal, Advocate, for the appellant.

**** A.K.SIKRI C.J.(Oral) CM No.751 of 2013 Heard.

For the reasons mentioned in the application, delay of 15 days in re-filing the present appeal is condoned.

C.M.stands disposed of.

LPA No.282 of 2013 (O&M) The appellant had absented himself from duty w.e.f.20.03.2009 till the date of passing of the order dated 27.08.2009 when his services were terminated.

The appellant challenged his termination on the ground that no show-cause notice was given or enquiry held against him.

The learned Single Judge has proceeded on the basis that the absence from service w.e.f.20.03.2009 till 27.08.2009 was not disputed and therefore such a case did not call for any interference.

However, it is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant infact performed duties during this period and was not absent for the entire period as stated and had a chance to explain been given to the appellant by holding an enquiry, he would have done so.

This submission is made on the basis of some additional documents filed not LPA No.282 of 2013 (O&M) [2].alongwith the appeal.

Because of this reason, the learned Senior Counsel submits that the appellant be permitted to withdraw the present appeal with liberty to file appeal against the impugned order before the Appellate Authority based upon the aforesaid documents.

Liberty granted.

The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

Needless to mention that when such an appeal is preferred by the appellant before the Appellate Authority, the Appellate Authority shall apply its own mind without influenced by the observations made by the learned Single Judge in the impugned order.

(A.K.SIKRI) CHIEF JUSTICE 26 03.2013 (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) 'ravinder' JUDGE