Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.47 seconds)
Documents citing Wali Mohammad Mir vs State Of J&K And Ors on 1 May, 2010

Dr. Mir Zaffar Aman vs Sheikh Babar Ali And Anr on 8 June, 2016

During the course of hearing of this Reference another judgment delivered by the learned Writ Court on 30.03.2011 in Masood Alamgir Shah (Dr.) v State of J&K, 2011(2) JKJ 489, was brought to the notice of the Court wherein the Court at para 11 of the judgment, as would be referred to hereinafter, has obviously taken a different view than expounded in Dr. Mohammad Afzal Wani v State of J&K (supra).
Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench Cites 36 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Dr. Mir Zaffar Aman vs State Of Jammu & Kashmir Through ... on 8 June, 2016

36. The arguments advanced by Mr. R. A. Jan, Senior Advocate, that there is no conflict in the judgments; or that the instant Reference is not competent or that the judgment in Dr. Mohammad Afzal Wani v State of J&K (supra) is per incuriam are all untenable. Once the term dies non means what we have elaborately discussed above - the period is non est and not to be counted or taken into consideration for any purpose whatsoever - and since this term was introduced and existed in the Government Instruction under Article 163 CSR by virtue of SRO 80 of 1972, there is no question of the prevalence of different fact situations in the above said decided cases. We have also already mentioned there is no provision akin to Article 163 of the CSR contained in the J&K Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1979, nor is the said provision inconsistent with any of the provisions contained therein. Therefore, undisputedly, it applies to all employees. So far as the argument of Mr. Jan, learned Senior counsel concerning Rule 24 of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1956 is concerned, this point stands covered by our finding that when a period is treated as dies non, how the continuance of the service in that class, category or grade with reference to which the question arises would take place. To reiterate, we may say when a period of absence is treated as dies non, the seniority will continue to have reference to the date of first appointment and depend upon the length of service in that class, category or grade, of course, minus the dies non. As regards the other submission concerning Rule 25 of the 1979 Leave Rules, the learned Senior Counsel seems to forget that the provision relates to absence after expiry of leave, not unauthorised absence. Unauthorised absence from duty constitutes a misconduct involving loss of appointment. Reference to 1979 leave rules is irrelevant, for, there is no provision entitling a government servant to desert his duties. A Government servant cannot even proceed on leave unless it is sanctioned, except, of course, on medical grounds.
Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench Cites 36 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1