Supreme Court- Bhagwan Dass and Anr. v. Punjab State Electricity Board

Appellant No. 1 was working with Respondent-Board. While in service he became totally blind. He remained absent from duty without any sanctioned leave for more than three years. A chargesheet was issued against Appellant initiating disciplinary proceedings against him for gross misconduct under Regulation 8 of the Punjab State Electricity Board Employees Punishment & Appeal Regulation 1971. Meanwhile, Appellant requested the Board to retire him from service and also requested that his wife be employed in his place. The chargesheet issued against the Appellant was withdrawn and Appellant was relieved from service. Aggrieved by this, Appellant filed an appeal before the High Court, which was dismissed. Hence, present appeal. Held, that in the letter for retirement, Appellant requested to be retired but at the same time requested that his wife should be given a suitable job. The letter was not a voluntary offer for retirement. Therefore, it was the duty of the superior officers to explain to him the correct legal position and to tell him about his legal rights. Since they failed to do so the action of the concerned officers was depreciable. Denial of a disabled persons rights would not only be unjust and unfair to them and their families but would create larger and graver problems for the society at large therefore termination was bad and illegal. Appellant entitled to all service benefits.

Manupatra Round up