- (1.)This Writ Appeal is against the order of the learned single Judge passed in W.P.(MD)No. 10075 of 2007 dated 28.9.2010 wherein this Court rejected the Writ Petition as misconceived and bereft of reasons. The order under challenge before the learned single Judge relates to an order of dismissal from service in a departmental enquiry on the ground that the appellant had abstained from attending the office continuously without giving any reason.
(2.)The facts leading to the filing of the Writ Appeal are as follows:-
(i) The appellant herein joined as Office Assistant in the year 1977 in the respondent Municipality. He was subsequently promoted as a sanitary work supervisor and the nature of his work is to allot work to several sanitary workers and to maintain muster roll. Evidently, without even applying for leave from his higher officials, the appellant herein did not report to duty from 28.1.2004 to 4.3.2004. The Sanitary Inspector submitted a report on 4.3.2004 on the said fact and based on that, the disciplinary proceedings were initiated by the Municipality through the Commissioner as per Rule 5(2) of the Regulations 1977 framed under the Tamil Nadu Municipal Public Health Services (Non- Centralised, Regular) Discipline and Appeals Regulations. The charge memo was issued to the appellant and the same was received on 7.4.2004. The appellant was asked to submit an explanation within 15 days from the date of receipt of charge memo. Admittedly, no explanation was given for the charges.

(ii) The appellant states that he was suffering from Hepatitis B and was hospitalised from 28.1.2004 to 31.10.2004. He could not move any where. Hence, he could not apply for the leave. His wife who was illeterate went in person to the respondent Municipality and informed about the appellant's illness and requested to grant leave. After recovery from illness on 31.10.2004, he applied for medical leave from 28.1.2004 to 31.10.2004 along with medical certificate issued by the Government Hospital and requested the first respondent to allow him to join duty. However, the petitioner was directed to get the medical certificate from the medical board and accordingly, appeared before the medical board. The appellant states that the board recommended that his case be considered on medical grounds and that he was fit for service. Thereafter, from 1.11.2004 to 5.12.2004, once again he applied for medical leave along with medical certificate on account of further illness. When he reported to duty on 6.12.2004, he was not allowed to attend work. In the background of this, the appellant states that the first respondent passed an order on 20.9.2005 removing him from service on the ground that he abstained from duty without any authorisation. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant preferred an appeal before the second respondent, who once again confirmed the order in proceedings Na.Ka.No.12808/06/J1 dated 19.9.2007. Aggrieved by this, the present Writ Petitioner is before this Court.

(3.)On notice, the respondents filed the counter in the Writ Petition stating that inspite of several opportunities granted to the appellant to appear in person before the Commissioner to represent his case, the petitioner did not avail any of his opportunities and hence, an exparte order was passed removing the appellant from service. It is stated that although the appellant received the questionnaire on 18.6.2004, and thereafter, ultimately, intimation was given on 14.9.2004 to appear in person before the Commissioner, the appellant did not appear. On 3.11.2004, the Commissioner received the letter enclosing certificate from Dr.K.Rajasekaran from the appellant dated nil sent through Courier service that he was suffering from jaundice from 28.1.2004 to 31.10.2004.