JUDGMENT 1. - . This petition exhibits gross callousness about the functioning of the concerned office of the Medical and Health Department. On 2.8.96, after hearing learned counsel for the parties, this Court (Hon'ble V.K. Singhal, J.) passed the following order : "The Director, Medical and Health Services, is directed to initiate disciplinary action within 15 days from today against the C.M.H.O. Jaipur, who was respondents for not taking any action against the petitioner for his alleged absence from 4.10.85 onwards. The record is also stated to be missing from the office, which aggravates the situation and, therefore, complete enquiry be made and all the concerned persons who are responsible or involved, should be made liable for the negligence they have committed. The case is listed on 21.8.1996. The C.M.H.O. Jaipur would also be present in Court on that day." 2. The matter was finally heard on 2.9.96 in order to resolve the controversy. Resume of the necessary facts may be given as under : The petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Peon in the year 1961 and it appears that he was working continuously on the said post till 28th September, 1985. Thereafter, the petitioner did not attend his duties and according to him, he was suffering from mental disease and was not in a position to attend his duties. However, it appears that no action for his absence was taken by the concerned Officer of the Department. No notice was given to the petitioner for his absence nor any inquiry was held. His services were also not terminated by the respondents. On 27.2.93 he appeared before the Medical Officer, Block Primary Health Center, Bhandarej with written report to allow him to resume duty. Admittedly, he has not been allowed to resume his duties inspite of several requests in writing and representations made to the higher authorities, including the Chief Medical Officer, Dausa. 3. The petitioner has, therefore, approached this Court with a prayer to seek mandamus and direction to the respondents to take him in service with all consequential benefits. He is also claiming benefits of the intervening period between 4.10.85 to 26.2.93 during which he remained absent. In return, the respondents have not disputed that the petitioner was appointed in the year 1961, for that, he did not work in the department from 28th September, 1984. He is also claiming benefits of the intervening period between 4.10.85 to 26.2.93 during which he remained absent. In return, the respondents have not disputed that the petitioner was appointed in the year 1961, for that, he did not work in the department from 28th September, 1984. Their plea is that the petitioner, was transferred from Primary Health Center, Bhandarej to Government Hospital, Goneda vide order dated 17.9.85 passed by the Chief Medical and Health Services, Jaipur, but he did not join thereafter. Their pleas is that the petitioner has remained absent continuously and wilfully from September, 1985 and as such, he shall be deemed to have ceased to be a Government servant by operation of law. 4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that inspite of the fact that the petitioner remained absent for more than five years, he had a right to join service in absence of his removal or dismissal on the ground of his long absence. Learned counsel contended that the petitioner had fallen ill and he was suffering from mental disease, as such for a long period he remained absent as he was unfit to discharge his duties. It was also contended that there is no provision under the law or rules under which his service stood -terminated by mere remaining absent without any express order by the competent authority. Learned counsel, therefore, contended that in absence of his removal or dismissal he had a right to join service even after six years, absence. 5. From the pleadings of the parties, the following facts are borne out : (i) That the petitioner was appointed as Peon w.e.f. 19.2.61. Since then, he was working on the said post upto 28.2.85. (ii) From 28.2.85, he remained absent continuously and that too without any application for leave. (iii) On 27.2.93, he approached the Medical Officer with a prayer to allow him to join duties. Since then, he has been making written requests and representations, but he has not been taken on duty. 6. The entire problem has been created because-, the concerned Officers/Authority did not perform, their duties in taking timely action against the petitioner. If the petitioner had absented wilfully without any cause, they could have terminated his services in accordance with law. Unfortunately, no action was taken against the petitioner. 6. The entire problem has been created because-, the concerned Officers/Authority did not perform, their duties in taking timely action against the petitioner. If the petitioner had absented wilfully without any cause, they could have terminated his services in accordance with law. Unfortunately, no action was taken against the petitioner. Learned counsel for the respondents could not point out any provision of the Act or the Rules to show that by long absence the petitioner ceased to be a Government Servant. Admittedly, no order of removal, dismissal or termination has been passed by any competent authority. In that situation, the petitioner is entitled to join his dates. The petitioner has stated in his petition that he submitted application/joining report on 27.2.93 vide Annexure-1, but he was not allowed to join duties. The respondents have denied to have received such joining report. However, from Annexure 1 to 8 it transpires that the petitioner has been making repeated requests to allow him to join duty. 7. In view of the above facts, the question arises as to what order should be passed in the present petition. After giving my careful consideration to all the facts and circumstances, I think it just and proper to pass the following order : (i) That the petitioner shall be immediately taken on duty. (ii) From 27.2.93, the date on which he was not allowed to join study, he shall be paid back wages within three-months. (iii) The Director Medical and Health Services Jaipur, shall hold an inquiry in the entire matter and shall take suitable action against all erring officers who are found guilty for their lapses. (iv) The Director, Medical and Health Services shall also decide the claim of the petitioner with regard o payment of back wages from 28.9.85 to 26.2.93 (period during which he remained absent), by a speaking order. This question shall be decided within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The decision shall be conveyed to the petitioner immediately. (v) The concerned department shall also be free to initiate disciplinary enquiry against the petitioner in accordance with law. The petition stands disposed of as indicated above. This question shall be decided within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The decision shall be conveyed to the petitioner immediately. (v) The concerned department shall also be free to initiate disciplinary enquiry against the petitioner in accordance with law. The petition stands disposed of as indicated above. No order as to costs in the facts and circumstances of the case.Before parting with, I would like to express my serious concern about the manner in which the case of the petitioner has been handled by the concerned officers. Complications in the matter have been created by inaction on their part for which the State Exchequer is being unnecessarily burdened. While deciding the accountability of the concerned officer, the State Government shall be free to realise the amount of loss suffered on account of his inaction or negligence.A copy of this order be sent to the Secretary Medical and Health Department, Government of Rajasthan and the Director, Medical and Health Services, Jaipur for compliance and necessary action.Petition Disposed Of As Per Direction. *******