Man Mohan Garg v. Chairman Cum Managing Director National Ins Co Ltd & ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
! "#
Man Mohan Garg Petitioner
Versus
The Chairman"cum"Managing Director and others Respondent $%
& '()*$ +,-.*&%$.*$,./&,.&+ Present: " Mr.Ashok K.Sharma Bhana, Advocate for the petitioner.
&%$.*$,./&,.&+# 0 100
Application is allowed. The documents Annexures P"9 to P"16 are taken on record.
0
:
The petitioner is working as Senior Branch Manager in the respondent - National Insurance Company. Vide order dated 20.10.2006 (Annexure P"1), he was transferred from Bhiwani to Ambala. Pursuant to the said order, the petitioner was relieved from Bhiwani on 17.1.2007. Instead of joining at Ambala, the petitioner made repeated requests to the respondents for transferring him to Hissar, Rohtak or Sirsa. He remained absent from duty and joined only on 6.11.2007 at Hisar.
In the meantime, he was issued charge"sheet regarding disobedience of the order of transfer from Bhiwani to Ambala and for remaining absent from duty from 1.1.2007 to 5.11.2007. After conducting enquiry he was awarded punishment of `reduction of basic pay by one increment'.
As the salary of the petitioner for the period from 1.2.2007 to 5.11.2007 was not released, he filed CWP No.21828 of 2013, which was disposed of with a direction to the respondent to decide his representation, made in this regard, within three months of the receipt of a certified copy of that order. Consequently, the respondents released the salary of the petitioner.
Thereafter, he filed another CWP No.9106 of 2014 praying for grant of interest on the delayed payment of salary, which was disposed of on 13.5.2014 with a direction to the respondents to dispose of his representation expeditiously. Pursuant to the said directions, the respondents have passed order dated 15.7.2014 (Annexure P"7), relevant part of which reads as under:"
!"#!# !$"%& '
(
)"#
* &
+,
-' '-
* * $!$"!$$. $/""!$$. ,
& +'' 0 -
*
*'
' 1 02- * '
'1 02-3 2-
' - % 1 '
,
*' *
'-'-
*
& 4 *
((( (((5 In considered opinion of this Court, the aforesaid order is a well"reasoned order and does not warrant interference by this Court. Looking at the misconduct of the petitioner and also the fact that despite his having been found guilty of unauthorised absence from duty for a continuous period of about 10 months, the respondents taking a lenient view have released the salary of the petitioner for that period, there is no justification to direct the respondents to pay interest on the said amount.
The writ petition is dismissed.
! "#
&%$.*$,./&,.&+ gian +/* GIANENDER KUMAR 2015.02.23 13:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document