AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard learned Counsel for the Appellant on the question of admission.
This intra court appeal has been preferred as against the order dated 22.9.2008 passed by the Single Bench of this Court allowing CWP No. 2630/2005 filed by the Respondent No. 1 - Vinod Kumar. The Respondent No. 1 has assailed the order of termination of his service passed on 6.5.2004. The services appears to have been terminated on the ground of having remained absent for a long period of approximate 4 years. However, it is not in dispute that no enquiry was conducted by the employer. The Single Bench has opined that it was necessary to conduct the enquiry, as in view of Rajasthan Service Rules, under Rule 86(4), after 5 years of remaining absent, it could have been discerned that the employee was not interested to serve. The period of 5 years had not lapsed in this case. Consequently, the Single Bench has held that after holding due enquiry, the service of the Petitioner could have been terminated.
After hearing the counsel for the Appellants, we are of the opinion that it was necessary to hold enquiry for terminating services of the permanent employee. No enquiry was conducted into the cause of absence. The reasons given by the Single Bench appears to be proper. It is open to the Appellants to conduct enquiry and thereafter terminate the services.
In view of the aforesaid, we are not inclined to make interference in this intra court appeal. Resultantly, the same is hereby dismissed.