1985 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

MUSHTAK ALI KAZI (CHAIRMAN).‑ The appellant, a High School Teacher, Grade‑16, posted at Mehrab Ali Sodhro, District Khairpur, was served with a show‑cause notice issued by the Director, School Education, Hyderabad Region, as Authorised officer, in respect of the charge that he remained absent from duty from 1‑4‑1981 to 11‑4‑1981 (both days inclusive), i.e. for 11 days, unauthorisedly. The appellant in reply to the show‑cause notice explained that his son aged 6 years had been accidentally burnt and as a result of the burns he died. That since the case was serious he had despatched an application for leave to the District Education Officer, Khairpur, by registered post on 31st March, 1981 and the same was received by the District Education Officer, Khairpur, on 1‑4‑1981. He has produced the acknowledgement receipt duly stamped. The learned A.A.‑G. on behalf of the Government concedes that on examination of the Inward Register of the District Education Officer, Khairpur, he found that the entries were irregular and there were no entries from 1‑3‑1981 to 24‑1‑1982. This evidence regarding despatch of registered leave application, therefore, remained unrebutted. The department on consideration of the above facts treated the appellant leniently and awarded him the minor penalty of withholding of one annual increment for one year. The department thereafter condoned the absence and allowed the appellant extraordinary leave without pay for the period of 11 days absence. It has been argued by the appellant personally that he had to remain away from school on account of sheer necessity on getting information regarding the burning of his child. That he could not wait till the leave was sanctioned and intimation was sent to him. He has produced the medical certificate dated 19‑4‑1981 that his boy Saifullah was admitted as a case of severe burns of third degree. He was under going treatment and he expired on 9th April, 1981. It has thus not been disputed that the absence of the appellant for 11 days was due to sufficient cause and not deliberate. It has also been shown that the appellant had despatched the leave application in time, i.e. on the same day the boy was burnt. The absence for the period was condoned and he was allowed leave, though, without pay. Thus, this was a deserving case and the appellant should have been allowed leave, if due to him, and there was no occasion for taking action against the appellant and for penalising him just because his leave application got misplaced in the Office of the District Education Officer, or was not considered by him. The appellant's appeal is accordingly accepted and the order regarding imposition of penalty of stoppage of increment for one year is set aside. The 11 days leave without pay allowed to him should be converted into leave due and admissible. No order is made as to costs. A. E. Appeal accepted.