Now, so far as the impugned order is concerned, it proceeds to deprive the petitioner of his salary for the period 3.2.2023 to 22.2.2023 on ground that he was absent during the aforesaid period of time. Assuming that the petitioner remained absent for all this while, it is not denied that there are medical papers regarding his treatment. It cannot be said to be a case where he was feigning illness. The reasoning of the Senior Superintendent of Police that he ought have reported back at Etawah and then sought medical aid at the AIIMS, Saifai, is a course of action which might have been more advisable, but did not occur to the petitioner. Merely because a better course of treatment was available in the opinion of the Senior Superintendent of Police, does not mean that the petitioner's absence was unauthorized. The order impugned shows that the Senior Superintendent of Police has not disbelieved the fact that the petitioner was unwell. On this state of the material on record, it cannot be said that the petitioner had no medical reason for his absence beyond the leave sanctioned to him. If, therefore, the petitioner overstayed his leave and for a fact it has not been found that he has feigned illness, the only acceptable course open was to consider if the petitioner had any leave in his leave account, like earned leave or medical leave, which could be sanctioned and the petitioner paid for the period. It would be a different matter if
