Order Heard counsel for the petitioner. 2. No one appears for the •State. However, counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of Superintendent, T.B. Hospital, Koilwar, Bhojpur, Respondent NO.5. 3. Petitioner's prayer is for directing the respondents to accept her joining on the post of Sweeper and to grant her all consequential benefits for which she would have been entitled on joining the post. 4. Petitioner was appointed on the post of Sweeper in T.B. Hospital, Koilwar, Bhojpur in the year 1987 on compassionate ground. She joined her service on• 18.12.1987 and continued to work up till 23.6.2000. Petitioner's case is that on account of falling ill, she remained absent from 27.6.2000 to 12.11.2001. When she became fit, she came to give her joining alongwith the medical certificate on 13.11.2001, but her joining was not accepted. She tried her level best and continuously approached the respondents for accepting her joining but till the date of filing of this writ application, the respondents did not allow her to join on the post. 5. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of Respondent No. 5 another story has been narrated, though admitting that since 18.12.1987 to 23.6.2000 petitioner continuously worked on the post of Sweeper and she remained absent from her duty, without any leave or permission from 24.6.2000 to 12.11.2001. But the story regarding not allowing the petitioner to join her post on 13.11.2001, has been denied. It has been stated that petitioner's joining was accepted on 13.11.2001 and in order to examine her claim of illness for a long time, two doctors, namely, Dr. Manoj Kumar Ranjan and Dr. Nurus Sam mad were directed to medically examine her. The reports submitted by these doctors falsified the excuse of serious illness. From their reports it was apparent that she did not fell ill for a long time rather she procured her medical certificate in order to explain her unauthorized absence". Statement in the counter affidavit also indicate that just after her joining on 13.11.2001 petitioner again absented herself for 8 years. On account of her continuous absence for more than five years, she has lost her status of Govt. servant as provided under Rule 76 of the Bihar Service Code. 6. Statement in the counter affidavit also indicate that just after her joining on 13.11.2001 petitioner again absented herself for 8 years. On account of her continuous absence for more than five years, she has lost her status of Govt. servant as provided under Rule 76 of the Bihar Service Code. 6. Whether the petitioner's joining was accepted or not on 13.11.2001, or she again absented herself after re-joining on 13.11.2001, and its' consequences can be examined, in this background whether any show cause notice to the petitioner by the Respondents for long absence. Before terminating the petitioner from service, it was necessary for the respondents to give her an opportunity to explain her long unauthorized absence. 7. Rule 76 of Bihar Service Code is relevant on this point. No Govt. employee can be terminated, despite his/her continuous and long absence from service, unless he/she is given an opportunity to explain the position by initiating a proceeding against the employees. Since the respondents had not complied the provision under Rule 76 of Bihar Service Code, they should have accepted petitioner's joining, only after accepting the petitioner's joining, initiating a proceeding as provided under Rule 76 of the Bihar Service Code, the Respondent No. 5 could have issued an order of termination against the petitioner. So far period in between 13.11.2001 and the date on which after accepting joining and after initiating proceeding, final order will be passed. Petitioner s' all be paid her salary in minimum of her scale The Respondents may complete the departmental proceeding as soon as possible and pass necessary orders in the case of the petitioner, in accordance with Rule 76 of the Bihar Service Code. 8. With this observation and direction, this application is allowed.