IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 33909 of 2010(K)
1. SEYD JAHANGEER.C.K, AGED 46 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
2. THE DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION,
3. THE PRINCIPAL,
For Petitioner :SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :08/12/2010
O R D E R
K.T.SANKARAN, J.
------------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C). NO. 33909 OF 2010 K
------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 8th day of December, 2010
JUDGMENT
The petitioner while working as Lecturer in Electrical and
Electronics Engineering, Government Engineering College, Thrissur,
availed leave without allowances for five years with effect from
5.12.1994 for going abroad. The leave was further extended on two
successful terms of five years each, i.e., from 5.12.1999 to 4.12.2004
and from 5.12.2004 to 4.12.2009. The petitioner again applied for
leave without allowances for a further period of five years. The
application for granting leave from 5.12.2009 was not granted.
However, the petitioner did not continue to work and he went abroad.
Ext.P3 communication dated 10.6.2010 was issued by the Director of
Technical Education to the Principal, requesting the Principal to
direct the petitioner to rejoin duty within fifteen days, on failure of
which, disciplinary action would be taken against him. The petitioner
rejoined duty on 3.7.2010. Again he went abroad. The petitioner
filed W.P.(C) No.25937 of 2010 complaining about non-consideration
of his application for leave without allowances. That Writ Petition
was disposed of as per Ext.P4 judgment dated 19.8.2010, directing
the first respondent to consider the application on the merits.
W.P.(C) NO.33909 OF 2010
:: 2 ::
2. Thereafter, the first respondent passed Ext.P5 order dated
8.10.2010 rejecting the application for leave without allowances for
five years submitted by the petitioner. In Ext.P5 order, the first
respondent held that the application deserves no merit as per the
guidelines issued by the Government. The petitioner had already
availed fifteen years’ leave continuously and there was no
justification for granting leave for a further period of five years. It was
noticed in Ext.P5 that there is no valid PSC rank list in the branch of
Lecturers in Electrical and Electronics Engineering and vacancies of
Lecturers in Electrical and Electronics Engineering exist in the
Department. The report submitted by the Director of Technical
Education was duly taken note of by the first respondent. It was also
noticed in Ext.P5 that the Director of Technical Education did not
recommend sanctioning of the leave application.
3. The challenge against Ext.P5 is without merit. The
petitioner has already enjoyed leave for fifteen years. He was
working abroad all throughout. According to the first respondent, if
the petitioner is allowed to continue to take leave for another five
years, it would affect the functioning of the educational institution.
The petitioner does not have a right to claim that he should be
W.P.(C) NO.33909 OF 2010
:: 3 ::
granted leave for a continuous period of twenty years. The Division
Bench has recently deprecated the practice of granting leave without
allowances for long terms.
4. For the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any ground to
interfere with Ext.P5 order passed by the Government. The Writ
Petition fails and it is dismissed.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner is prepared to re-join duty on the reopening date in
January, 2011. It is submitted that there may be a direction to the
Government to regularize the period of absence of the petitioner
from 5.12.2009 till that date. Dismissal of this Writ Petition would not
stand in the way of the petitioner applying for re-joining duty and
applying to the appropriate authority for regularizing the period of
absence and if such an application is made, it will be considered on
the merits in accordance with law.
(K.T.SANKARAN)
Judge
ahz/