SC reprimands Kerala High Court

New Delhi, Nov 22 (UNI) The Supreme Court while upholding the order of the authorities inflicting a punishment of compulsory retirement on a scientist for remaining unauthorisedly absent from duty for over two years, has passed strictures against the Kerala high court saying that the approach of the high court was unusual and one=sided.

A bench comprising Justices G P Mathur and Dalveer Bhandari while setting aside the judgment of the high court observed," In a case involving overstay of leave and absence from duty, granting six months' time to join duty amounts to not only giving premium to indiscipline but is wholly subversive of the work culture in the organisation." The apex court allowed the appeal by the Union government against the judgment of the high court dated Aug. 10,2005 ordering reinstatement of the respondent George Philip who was working as Scientific Officer in Plasma Physics division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Trombay, Mumbai(BARC).

Philip applied for and was granted Commonwealth Scholarship by the ministry of Education for advance research training in Plasma Physics.

The government on February 8,1982 granted permission to the respondent to accept the Commonwealth scholarship for a period of two years and he was granted extraordinary leave for said period.

Leave period was to begin from August 24,1982 and the respondent instead of reprting for duty sought further extension of leave for another two years which was declined by the government and eight notices were sent to him to report for duty but Philip did not report for duty and reported for duty on December 10,1986. The respondent was removed from service on December 18,1990 after proper departmental inquiry.

The apex court in its judgment dated November 16 disapproved the approach of the high court and concluded by observing," Article 51 A (j) of the Constitution lays down that it shall be the duty of every citizen to strive towards excellence in all spheres of individual and collective activity so that the nation constantly rises to higher levels of endeavour and achievement. This cannot be achieved unless the employees maintain discipline and devotion to duty. Courts should not pass such orders which instead of achieving the underlying spirit and objects of Part-IV A of the Constitution has the tendency to negate and destroy the same.

In the result appeal is allowed with costs. The judgment and order dated September 17,1999 of the Tribunal and the judgment and order dated August 10,2005 of the high court are set aside and the order of compulsory retirement passed by the appellant is affirmed." UNI AKS/SC RP GC1918