Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rajan Mandloi vs Principal Secretary The State Of Madhya ... on 12 September, 2013
Author: Vimla Jain
Bench: Vimla Jain
1
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SEAT
AT JABALPUR
W.P. No.14273/2009
Rajan Mandloi
Vs.
State of Madhya Pradesh & another
Present: Hon'ble Shri Rajendra Menon, J. &
Hon'ble Mrs. Vimla Jain, J.
______________________________________________________
Shri Sanjay Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri R. P. Tiwari, learned Govt. Adv. for respondent
No.1.
Shri Ashish Shroti, learned counsel for respondent No.2.
__________________________________________________
ORDER
( 12 92013 ) Per : Shri Rajendra Menon, J.
Petitioner was appointed as a Civil Judge Class II, Mandsaur and the appointment was canceled on the ground of his non joining, has filed this writ petition challenging the order Annexure P/15 dated 7.8.2009 passed by the State Government canceling the appointment which was originally made on 4.4.2008 on the post of Civil Judge Class II. Petitioner has also challenged the order dated 12.10.2009 Annexure P/19 by which his representation against the impugned action has been rejected.
22. Facts in brief goes to show that petitioner was selected and was duly appointed on the post of Civil Judge Class II vide order dated 4.4.2008. The High Court posted him as First Civil Judge Class II at Mandsaur and the order in question was passed in this regard on 10.4.2008 vide Annexure P/1. As per this order petitioner was required to report and submit his joining to the concerned District and Sessions Judge within fifteen days from the date of receipt of the order Annexure P/1 dated 10.4.2008. Petitioner received this order on 28.4.2008 and accordingly was required to join the appointed place within 15 days thereof. Contending that petitioner is suffering from Lumber pain with Cellutis and therefore, he is not in a position to join in accordance to the stipulations contained in Annexure P/1, petitioner submitted a letter on 9.5.2008 to the High Court expressing his inability to join on the appointed post. He thereafter submitted a letter again on 8.5.2008 indicating that Doctor has advised further rest of 15 to 20 days. Copy of the letter in this regard is Annexure P/2. Vide Annexure P/3 dated 5.6.2008 the Registrar (Vigilance), High Court of M.P., Jabalpur informed the petitioner that his joining has been extended upto 8.6.2008 and he should join on or before 9.6.2008. The District Judge, Badwani also vide his communication Annexure P/4 dated 6.6.2008 informed the petitioner that he is required to join as Civil Judge Class II Trainee Judge at Mandsaur on 9.6.2008. It is said that petitioner submitted another application Annexure P/5 on 9.6.2008 expressing his inability to join and sought extension of joining time. Similar application seeking extension of joining time was submitted by the petitioner vide 3 Annexure P/6 dated 9.6.2008 and P/7 dated 21.10.2008 and therefore, the High Court vide Annexure P/8 on 14.11.2008 directed the petitioner to submit appropriate Medical Certificate about his ailment from the District Medical Board. However, the petitioner produced a Medical Certificate issued by the Civil Surgeon cum Chief Medical Officer, Mandsaur vide Annexure P/9 along with certain documents said to have been sent by post. Vide Annexure P/11 the petitioner again appeared before the Medical Officer, District Hospital, Badwani on 3.1.2009 and procured a Certificate and forwarded it along with a covering letter to respondent No.2 vide Annexure P/12 dated 15.1.2009. On 22.1.2009 petitioner was again directed to produce the Certificate issued by District Medical Board, Mandsaur within one week. This was not done. Instead the petitioner submitted the Certificate from the Senior Medical Officer, Indira Gandhi District Hospital, Mandsaur indicating that he is fit to join duties on 6.2.2009 and accordingly, it is said that petitioner submitted a letter along with application and Medical Certificate to the High Court on 6.2.2009 vide Annexure P/14-A informing that he is now fit to join duties. According to the petitioner he did not receive any communication after 6.2.2009 but all of a sudden he received impugned letter dated 7.8.2009 from the Respondent No.1 to the effect that his appointment to the post of Civil Judge, Class II (Recruitment Stage) dated 4.4.2008 has been canceled. Inter alia contending that petitioner was sick and without considering the totality of circumstances and his ailment, the impugned action has been taken, this writ petition has been filed.
43. Shri Sanjay Agrawal took us through the documents available on record and emphasized that when petitioner submitted the report on 6.2.2009 along with Medical Certificate, he was never informed through any communication made to him requiring him to join duties by 19.2.2009. It is said that the respondents have pleaded in their return that a communication was made to the petitioner directing him to join duties vide Annexure R/1 on 19.2.2009 and thereafter some communication was made to the District Judge, Mandsaur by the Registrar General of the High Court on 3.7.2009. It is said that letter Annexure R/1 dated 19.2.2009 was never received or served on the petitioner. Petitioner was all along in the impression that his application dated 6.2.2009 was under consideration and accordingly contending that after 6.2.2009 he never received any communication for joining as indicated in Annexure R/1 dated 19.2.2009, petitioner seeks for interference.
4. In rebuttal to the contentions made by the petitioner, respondents have stated in their return that petitioner did not join duties inspite of letter dated 19.2.2009 Annexure R/1.
5. Shri Sanjay Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a rejoinder to say that petitioner was never served this letter, it was not given to him and produces documents from the postal authorities to say that the communication dated 6.2.2009 has been served on the High Court but inspite thereof, he has not received any communication in response to the same. Shri Sanjay Agrawal 5 emphasized that he could not join duties because of his ailment. He thereafter submitted a joining along with Fitness Certificate on 6.2.2009 but without intimating him anything, impugned action is taken which is said to be unsustainable.
6. Shri Ashish Shroti, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 refuted the aforesaid and pointed out that petitioner was appointed on 10.4.2008, he was to join within 15 days of receipt of this appointment order. On 28.4.2008 petitioner received the order. In the garb of lumber pain with Cellutis petitioner did not join duties. When communications were made by him, petitioner was informed to submit Medical Certificate from the District Medical Board. Shri Shroti points out that on 22.1.2009 vide Annexure P/13 and again prior to that on 14.11.2008 vide Annexure P/8 petitioner was specifically informed to submit Medical Certificate from the District Medical Board with regard to his ailment. Petitioner deliberately disobeyed these orders and instead appeared before the Civil Surgeon, Mandsaur or the Medical Officer at Badwani and obtained Certificates Annexure P/9, P/10. It is stated that petitioner has not only disobeyed the direction of High Court but when he reported for joining, communication Annexure R/1 dated 19.2.2009 was made to him. It was sent through the postal authorities in the address of the petitioner and it was dispatched through the dispatch register and normally it should have been delivered on the petitioner. Inspite thereof, he did not appear and therefore, the impugned action has been taken. Shri Shroti submits that even if for a moment it is assumed that communication Annexure R/1 was not received by the petitioner, then the conduct of the 6 petitioner in keeping quite in his house from 6.2.2009 till the impugned action was taken on 7.8.2009 i.e. for a period of more than 8 months, clearly goes to show that petitioner was not interested in working and he was simply trying to avoid appearance before the Competent Authority along with Certificate of District Medical Board. Accordingly, contending that the conduct of the petitioner dis-entitles him from claiming any relief and respondents have not committed any error in canceling his appointment, Shri Shroti prays for dismissal of the petition.
7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. It is seen from the record that petitioner in the garb of Lumber pain with Cellutis did not join duties after 28.4.2008 continuously upto 6.2.2009. He kept on seeking extension and submitted medical certificate about his ailment. The ailment of the petitioner are not so serious in nature which prevents him from joining duty. That apart, the conduct of the petitioner goes to show that he was not at all interested in joining duties. When he submitted the medical certificates issued by the Medical Officers and various other Doctors, the High Court on 14.11.2008 vide Annexure P/8 directed him to produce the Medical Certificate of the District Medical Board in support of his application dated 2.12.2008. The District Medical Board consists of three Doctors and as this Board is constituted by the State Government, petitioner did not submit any Medical Certificate from the District Medical Board in support of his application dated 2.12.2008 but after a period of two months submitted a Certificate Annexure P/9 issued by the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical 7 Officer, Mandsaur along with certain prescriptions. This Certificate Annexure P/9 also shows that petitioner appeared before this authority on 2.12.2008 i.e. after a period of more than 15 days after the communication Annexure P/8 was issued to him. When the High Court had directed the petitioner to appear before the District Medical Board and submit a Certificate, the conduct of the petitioner in not doing so instead sending a certificate issued by a Civil Surgeon cannot be appreciated by this Court. Again when the petitioner was directed to submit the Certificate of the District Medical Board vide Annexure P/13 dated 22.1.2009, petitioner disobeyed this order and appeared before the Medical Officer, District Hospital, Badwani and submitted the letter Annexure P/14 supported by Medical Certificate of Medical Officer, Badwani dated 6.2.2009. This conduct of the petitioner in not appearing before the District Medical Board and submitting the Medical Certificate as demanded by the High Court is nothing but an act unbecoming of a person who was to be appointed to the post of Civil Judge. Petitioner has not only disobeyed these orders but remained fully satisfied after submitting application to the High Court on 6.2.2009 and did not even bother to find as to what has happened to this application. It was only when his appointment was canceled that he woke up and represented into the matter. The petitioner now says that the communication Annexure R/1 dated 19.2.2009 was not received by him. We are unable to believe this contention of the petitioner. No malafide or bias is attributed to any person or official. On the contrary the letter Annexure R/1 dated 19.2.2009 has been issued by the 8 High Court in the normal course of the business on the residential address of the petitioner. It has been sent by proper dispatch procedure bearing dispatch number, that being so it has to be assumed that this letter would have been received by the petitioner. Even assuming for a minute that this letter was not received by him, the conduct of the petitioner in sitting quite in his house and keeping a total silence without making any enquiry from the Registrar General of the High Court or the District Judge, Mandsaur where the petitioner was not permitted to join for 8 months after 6.2.2009, shows that petitioner was not interested in joining duties and the conduct of the petitioner in keeping quiet after 6.2.2009 without seeking any response from the authorities, goes to show that petitioner was not at all interested in joining and was somehow sitting in house for reasons best known to him. The totality of circumstances and the material that comes on record goes to show that petitioner disobeyed the communications issued by the High Court on more than three occasions. He did not submit the Medical Certificate by the District Medical Board when demanded by the High Court and after communications were made asking him to join duties, he did not join duties. The contention of the petitioner that he did not receive the communication dated 19.2.2009 also seems to be incorrect, we are unable to accept these contentions made on behalf of the petitioner. Taking note of the totality of circumstances, we are of the considered view that he is not a fit person to be appointed on the post of Civil Judge.
8. Keeping in view the aforesaid, we find the order 9 passed by the High Court to be reasonable one which does not call for any interference.
9. Accordingly, finding no ground for interference into the matter, the petition is dismissed.
(Rajendra Menon) (Mrs. Vimla Jain)
Judge Judge
mrs.mishra