IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 17332 of 2004(L)
1. DR.T.L.JAMES, CIVIL SURGEON (RTD),
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
... Respondent
2. THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES,
For Petitioner :SRI.G.UNNIIKRISHNON
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :05/07/2010
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
================
W.P.(C) NO. 17332 OF 2004 (L)
=====================
Dated this the 5th day of July, 2010
J U D G M E N T
The challenge in the writ petition is two fold.
2. First is against Ext.P4 Government Order dated 9/2/04
to the extent the leave without allowance granted to the
petitioner for the period from 12/7/99 to 30/4/2000 is subject to
the condition that the period will not count for pension. Petitioner
submits that in view of the provisions contained in Rule 26 of Part
III KSR and in the light of the judgment of the Division Bench in
Dr.Elizabeth Vijayan Zacharia v. Director of Health
Services (ILR 1999(1) Kerala 521), the Government could not
have imposed such a condition.
3. However, the learned Government Pleader points out
that prior to the period 12/7/99 to 30/4/2000, petitioner was on
leave without allowance availed under Appendix XIIA of Part I KSR
for the period 18/8/89 to 2/7/99. It is stated that thereafter he
applied for continuation of the leave without rejoining duty, and
therefore, the leave granted for the period from 12/7/99 till
30/4/2000 was in continuation of the leave without allowances
WPC No. 17332/04
:2 :
granted to him for the period 18/8/89 to 2/7/99.
4. A reading of Ext.P4 order itself supports the said
contention raised by the learned Government Pleader. If that be
the case, the leave granted to the petitioner is fully covered by
Rule 4 of Appendix XIIA of Part I KSR, which will disentitle the
petitioner to claim pension for the said period.
5. The other contention raised by the counsel for the
petitioner is that he joined service as Assistant Surgeon on
22/6/1970 and was granted first time bound higher grade in the
scale of Civil Surgeon Grade II w.e.f. 21/10/84 on completion of 10
years service. It is stated that he ought to have granted IInd time
bound higher grade on completion of 18 years service. It is
complained that the said benefit was not granted. However,
learned Government Pleader points out on instructions that it was
because the petitioner did not render service for the prescribed
period of 18 years. It is pointed out that he was on leave without
allowances under Appendix XIIA for the period 15/3/78 to 20/5/78,
12/12/81 to 9/4/83 and for the period from 18/8/89 onwards till
30/4/2000 when he retired from service. It is also pointed out
that a claim made by the petitioner in this behalf was considered
WPC No. 17332/04
:3 :
by the Government and was rejected by order dated 15/7/04.
6. On the facts, therefore, it can be seen that the
petitioner did not discharge duties for the prescribed period of 18
years and it was therefore that his claim was turned down by the
Government. Further, the order dated 15/7/04 issued to the
petitioner is also not under challenge. In such circumstances,
petitioner can have no grievance that the second time bound
higher grade was declined to him.
Writ petition fails and is dismissed.
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp