aforesaid qualifying service on the ground that the respondent was absent from duty from 3.7.1978 to 16.12.1981 cannot be accepted in law because neither there was any communication to the petitionerrespondent nor any show cause notice issued. The mandate of both the aforementioned Rules is that interruption in service of a government employee should have been caused by willful absence from duty and unauthorised absence without leave. It is well settled that willful absence from duty or un-authorised absence without leave is a misconduct, as has been held by a 5-Judges Constitution Bench of Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the case of Jai Shankar v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1966 SC 492 . Without holding any inquiry, no such excuse would be permissible. Therefore, it has to be regarded as a mere excuse for denying an employee his qualifying service of long years, which is more than six years in the present case. Moreover, under Rule 4.23 such an interruption has to be regarded by reasons beyond the control of government employee because had be been given an opportunity, he might have explained the reasons of his absence when he was working on ad hoc basis. Therefore, there is no merit in the instant appeal. Dismissed.
