Paromita Verma Vs Union of India and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Paromita Verma Vs Union of India and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to the petitioner to apply for regularization of her period of absence beyond the foreign study leave - by grant of LAP or LHAP from her credit or exemption under Rule 14 of the Study Leave Rules - with the merits left open to the authorities and an expectation of expeditious consideration.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner's period of absence beyond the sanctioned foreign study leave (1.10.2010 to 25.2.2011) can be regularized - by grant of LAP or LHAP from her credit, or exemption under Rule 14 of the Study Leave Rules - a question the Court left open to the authorities.

Court's answer

Liberty granted to the petitioner to submit an application for regularization of her period of absence beyond the foreign study leave, either by grant of LAP or LHAP due to her credit or by seeking exemption under Rule 14 of the Study Leave Rules; the Court expressed no opinion on the merits and left the entire issue open to be considered by the authorities in accordance with law.

Key takeaways

Observation that if the petitioner makes her regularization application diligently, the authorities are expected to reciprocate with expeditious consideration.obiter¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Study leave overstay - regularization left to authorities. Petitioner's foreign study leave ran from 1.10.2009 to 30.09.2010; the course could be completed only on 25.2.2011, and the respondents treated 1.10.2010 to 25.2.2011 (four months and twenty five days) as unsanctioned overstay. Following the respondents' letter dated 5th May, 2011, the petitioner elected to seek regularization of the absence period either by grant of LAP or LHAP from her credit or by exemption under Rule 14 of the Study Leave Rules. The Bench granted liberty to file such an application, expressly declined to express any opinion on the merits, left the entire issue open to be considered by the authorities in accordance with law, and disposed of the writ petition, observing that a diligent application should receive expeditious consideration.

24.03.2025 (D/L-6) Ct. No.4 (B.K.N.)

W.P.C.T. 128 of 2023

Paromita Verma Vs. Union of India & Ors.

Mrs. Madhu Priya, Mr. Dhananjay Nayak

...for the Petitioner Mr. D. N. Roy, Sr. Adv., Ms. Amrita Pandey, Mr. Ghanshyam Pandey, Ms. Bipasha Jaiswal

...for the U.O.I.

The issue arising for consideration in the present case is based on the following facts:

The petitioner had proceeded for foreign study leave.

The study leave was sanctioned for the period commencing from 1.10.2009 till 30.09.2010. The course completion, however, could not be done before 25.2.2011.

In view of such facts, the respondents considered the petitioner to have overstayed the study leave from 1.10.2010 to 25.2.2011 that is by four months and twenty five days. This period was not sanctioned.

After making submission on the merits of the matter on previous occasions, on the last day the matter was adjourned when the learned counsel for the

2

petitioner submitted that she would be taking instructions whether the petitioner wants to avail the advice of the respondents contained in their letter dated 5^th May, 2011.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has come back today with instructions and informs the Court that the petitioner wishes to submit an application for regularization of her period of absence beyond the foreign study leave period, however, by granting LAP or LHAP due to her credit as on date; or seeking an exemption under the provisions contained in Rule 14 of the Study Leave Rules.

Since we are allowing such liberty to the learned counsel for the petitioner we do not consider it appropriate to express any opinion on the merits of the claim at this point, as the entire issue is left open to be considered by the authorities in accordance with law.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

We would only observe that if the petitioner makes an application diligently, it is expected that the authorities will reciprocate expeditious consideration of the same.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J.)

(Supratim Bhattacharya, J.)