The petitioner, representing the State of Rajasthan, filed a writ petition challenging the Appellate Tribunal's order granting commuted leave to a respondent government employee for undergoing correspondence M.Phil studies.
The writ petition and stay petition were dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CWP 4061/2K
//1//
In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench
**
Civil Writ Petition No.4061/2000 State of Raj. & (2) Ors. Versus Shri Surendra Kumar & Anr.
Date of Order ::: 10/04/08
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi
Mr. Shivlal Meena, Dy.Govt.Advocate, for petitioners State Mr. CP Sharma, for the respondent No.1.
Instant writ petition has been filed
by the petitioner assailing the judgment dated
12/10/1999 Rajasthan Civil Service Appellate
Tribunal, Jaipur (“Tribunal”) whereby the
petitioner was directed to grant benefit of
commuted leave to the respondent to which he
was entitled in terms of R.93(2)(ii) of the
Rajasthan Civil Service Rules (“RSR”).
Respondent No.1 was serving as Deputy
Inspector of School (Physical Education),
Ajmer. He applied for permission to take
admission in M.Phil from Kurukshetra
University. After considering his application
permission was granted vide order dt.19/05/98,
to undergo M.Phil through correspondence.
Since respondent No.1 was undergoing M.Phil,
he applied for commuted leave, which was
declined by the petitioner vide order dated
31/07/1998 on the premise that such leave can
CWP 4061/2K //2//
be granted to the applicant under R.93 (2)(II)
of the RSR, if sanctioning authority is
satisfied that the study leave desired by the
employee is in public interest. Respondent
No.1 filed an appeal before the Tribunal.
After adjudication, it was observed that
permission for study was granted by Competent
Authority; obviously such permissions are
granted in public interest and once permission
for study has been granted to the employee/
applicant, ordinarily benefit of commuted
leave is not to be refused unless there are
reasons forthcoming. Even, in the reply filed
by the department before the Tribunal, no
justification came forward declining commuted
leave applied for by the employee and the
petitioner Department came only with the plea
that it is the satisfaction of sanctioning
authority, It is true that discretion vests
with sanctioning authority but it is always to
be exercised judiciously and the reasons for
rejection are always to be disclosed, which
were neither placed before the Tribunal nor
before this Court. Learned Tribunal, after
taking note of R.93(2)(ii) of RSR observed
that since respondent No.1 was having leave to
his credit, ordinarily is not to be refused
CWP 4061/2K //3//
particularly when permission for study was
granted by competent authority.This Court
has gone through the finding recorded under
order impugned, and does not find manifest
error which may call for interference.
Consequently, writ petition fails and
is hereby dismissed alongwith stay petition.
No order as to costs.
Bharti/p.3/4061CW2K-1004.doc
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the Rajasthan Civil Service Appellate Tribunal's finding that commuted leave should be granted to a government employee undergoing M.Phil studies approved
Whether the department failed to justify its refusal to grant commuted leave.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Shri Surendra Kumar
Ajay Rastogi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court