JUDGMENT : Bivas Pattanayak, J. 1. This writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the Memorandum No. 6-2023/CRT/PB/CON dated 9th February 2023 for holding inquiry under Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 against the petitioner in a departmental proceeding in relation to Memorandum No. 04-2023/CRT/PB/CON dated 31st January 2023 issued by respondent No. 1, Learned District & Sessions Judge, Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Port Blair and also for direction upon Respondent no. 1 to treat the period of absence of petitioner from his place of posting as “Leave on Duty” and further for releasing remunerations, allowances etc. in favour of the petitioner. 2. The petitioner is a Lower Grade Clerk under Respondent no.1, Learned District & Sessions Judge, Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Port Blair and attached to the office of Respondent no.2, Learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, North & Middle Andaman District, Mayabunder. By dint of Office Order No. 7 dated 10th May 2021, the petitioner was deputed to proceed to Port Blair to hand over some urgent official files and letters and other miscellaneous works. In compliance to the aforesaid order, the petitioner reached Port Blair in the evening of 11th May 2021 and handed over files/dak to the Diary Section of Respondent No. 1, Learned District & Sessions Judge, Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Port Blair. By the aforesaid order, the petitioner was directed to return back to his station at Mayabunder on or before 17th May 2021. However, the petitioner failed to report back to the station at Mayabunder as per the direction contained in the Office Order No.7 dated 10th May 2021 and he joined on 28th June 2021. On the ground of his deliberate absence from his place of posting, departmental proceedings is initiated against him for holding inquiry under Rule 14 of Central Civil Service (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rule, 1965 vide Memorandum No. 6-2023/CRT/PB/CON dated 9th February 2021. Being aggrieved by such departmental proceedings initiated at the instance of Respondent No. 1, the petitioner has preferred the present writ application for quashing of such proceeding and incidental reliefs. 3. Mr. Being aggrieved by such departmental proceedings initiated at the instance of Respondent No. 1, the petitioner has preferred the present writ application for quashing of such proceeding and incidental reliefs. 3. Mr. Arul Prasanth, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance to the Office Order No. 7 dated 10th May 2021, the petitioner proceeded to Port Blair and delivered the concerned files and dak to the Office of learned District & Sessions Judge, Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Port Blair on 12th May 2021. However, from 13th May 2021 administrative orders were issued from the office of the District Magistrate, South Andaman District, Port Blair for lock down due to surge in positive cases of COVID-19. During such period of lock down, there was no such public transport to reach Mayabunder and due to which reasons the petitioner could not join his office in terms of the direction contained in the Office Order No.7 dated 10th May 2021. He drew the attention of the Court to the fact that the petitioner was prevented from sufficient cause to report back to his place of posting due to non-availability of public transport has been brought to the notice of the appointing authority. He further submitted that though buses were plied since 23rd May 2021 from Port Blair on urgent basis but those buses plied only till Middle Strait and not to Mayabunder which is the place of posting of the Petitioner. During such period of pandemic, the learned District Judge, Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Port Blair treated the absence of other staff as “leave on duty” which benefit was never given to the petitioner for the reasons better known to the Administration. In light of the aforesaid submissions, he prayed for quashing of the Memorandum issued for holding inquiry in departmental proceeding and also for considering the absence of the petitioner during such period as “leave on duty” and incidental relief. 4. In reply to the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. Sumit Karmakar, learned Advocate for the Respondents referring to the letter of Deputy Director (Administration) dated 24th June 2021 submits that special buses were provided during the COVID period for the stranded passengers which could have been well availed by the petitioner for reaching his place of posting. In reply to the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. Sumit Karmakar, learned Advocate for the Respondents referring to the letter of Deputy Director (Administration) dated 24th June 2021 submits that special buses were provided during the COVID period for the stranded passengers which could have been well availed by the petitioner for reaching his place of posting. However, no such endeavour was taken by the petitioner to join his duties though he had an opportunity to do the same, thereby he has wilfully and deliberately violated the Office Order No.7 dated 10th May 2021. He further indicates that no immediate steps informing his predicament has been taken by the petitioner before the Administration. Such being the position, the petitioner cannot be extended the benefit of situation prevalent during the COVID pandemic. 5. The only point upon which the writ application hinges is whether the petitioner was prevented by sufficient cause to report back to his place of posting within the period stipulated in Office Order No.7 dated 10th May 2021. 6. In order to examine the facts and the ground raised it would be apposite to reproduce the Articles of charge contained in Memorandum No.04-2023/CRT/PB/CON :- “STATEMENT OF ARTICLES OF CHARGE FRAMED AGAINST SHRI SHABBIR SAYYED, LOWER GRADE CLERK Article 1 That the said Shri Shabbir Sayyed while functioning as Lower Grade Clerk in the office of Additional District and Sessions Judge, N&M Andaman, Mayabunder proceeded on official duty vide Office Order No. 07 dated 10.05.2021. on 11.05.2021 from Mayabunder who was assigned duty from 11.05.2021 to 17.05.2021. He deliberately absented himself from his place of posting from 11.05.2021 to 19.06.2021 unauthorizedly and without sufficient grounds. He though deputed to Port Blair on duty from 11.05.2021 to 17.05.2021 did not report to this office during the said period without an intimation. Thus, Shri. Shabbir Sayyed, Lower Grade Clerk has exhibited lack of devotion, dereliction of duty and conduced himself in a manner unbecoming of public servant violating the provision of Rule 3 of CCS (Conduct Rule 1964). District and Sessions Judge Andaman & Nicobar Islands” 7. Thus, Shri. Shabbir Sayyed, Lower Grade Clerk has exhibited lack of devotion, dereliction of duty and conduced himself in a manner unbecoming of public servant violating the provision of Rule 3 of CCS (Conduct Rule 1964). District and Sessions Judge Andaman & Nicobar Islands” 7. The allegation that culls out from the aforesaid Statement of Articles of charge is that the petitioner deliberately absented himself from his place of posting from 11th May 2021 to 19th June 2021 and though he was deputed to Port Blair on duty from 11th May 2021 till 17th May 2021 but did not report to the office without an intimation. 8. Admittedly, by Office Order No. 7 dated 10th May 2021 the petitioner was directed to proceed to Port Blair in the morning of 11th May 2021 and return back to the station at Mayabunder on or before 17th May 2021. In compliance to the aforesaid directions, the petitioner handed over the relevant files and daks to the office of the Respondent no.1, learned District & Sessions Judge, Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Port Blair on 12th May 2021 (Annexure P-9). Thus the allegation that he did not report to the office during the period from 11th May 2021 to 17th May 2021 does not stand to reason. It is not in dispute that the period from 13th May 2021 till 19th June 2021 there was lock down prevailing in the Islands by dint of order issued by the office of the District Magistrate, South Andaman District from time to time which would be evident from the Order No. 803 dated 28th June 2021 issued by the Office of the District Magistrate. It is further found that the petitioner by whatsapp message (received on 25th May 2021) informed the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, North and Middle Andaman District, Mayabunder of the non availability of public transport which was preventing him to return back to the station (Annexure P-13). The Administration of the Islands provided public transport from Port Blair to North and Middle Andaman for COVID patients and stranded passengers as revealed from letter dated 24th June 2021 of the Deputy Director (Administration). It is further revealed from the aforesaid letter that on 23rd May 2021, six number of buses were meant to operate in the above route for taking the stranded passengers. It is further revealed from the aforesaid letter that on 23rd May 2021, six number of buses were meant to operate in the above route for taking the stranded passengers. The petitioner in the affidavit-in-reply has annexed the duty slip of the six buses (Annexure P 29) which has been obtained under the Right to Information Act from the office of the Andaman and Nicobar Administration, Directorate of Transport. Upon perusal of the aforesaid duty slips of the buses proposed to take the stranded passengers, it is found that the buses plied from Bus Terminus Port Blair to Middle Strait and back. Needless to mention that the duty slips does not reveal that the buses allotted for taking the stranded passengers were plied till Mayabunder. During such period of pandemic, Respondent no.1 learned District & Sessions Judge, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Port Blair has considered the absence of the staff residing at Bambooflat as “leave on duty” vide office order no. 426 dated 18th May 2021 and 445 dated 2nd June 2021 (Annexure P 15). From the facts emanating from the materials on record it manifest that the petitioner was prevented from sufficient cause from reporting back to his station in terms of Office Order no.7 dated 10th May 2021. It is pertinent to note that bearing in mind the pandemic situation and non availability of the public transport, the Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Department of Personnel and Training issued Office Memorandum dated 28th July 2020 which is as follows :- Sl. No. Situation Clarification 1. Government Servants who were on official tour and were unable to return to their Headquarters (HQs) due to non-availability of public transport Deemed to have joined duty on the date of expiry of official tour, if intimation in any form, indicating difficulty in joining duty due to non-availability of public transport/ flights, has been given by the Government servant to the office 9. In view of the above discussions, the departmental proceedings for holding inquiry vide Memorandum No. 6-2023/CRT/PB/CON dated 9th February 2023 issued by the learned District & Sessions Judge, Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Port Blair against the petitioner stands quashed. 10. In view of the above discussions, the departmental proceedings for holding inquiry vide Memorandum No. 6-2023/CRT/PB/CON dated 9th February 2023 issued by the learned District & Sessions Judge, Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Port Blair against the petitioner stands quashed. 10. Respondent no.1 shall treat the absence of the petitioner from his place of posting from 11th May 2021 till 19th June 2021 as “Leave on Duty” and shall also release the remuneration, emoluments etc, if any, to which the petitioner is entitled in respect of such period within a period of three months from date. 11. With the aforesaid observation, the writ application stands disposed of. 12. All connected application, if any, stands disposed of. 13. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. 14. Urgent Photostat certified copy of the order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all legal formalities.