^ /-r ^ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR fC.G.) WRITPETITION fSVNO. 4o^° OF 2009 PETITIONER ^^' y^y'"..^ -\^^^%- .,..;^>': ^ ^ ^"..^^>" '^'""' •,y^' RESPONDENTS 1. 2. Smt. Sanjana Raj Wife of Shri Anish Raj, aged about 40 years, Occupation Service, Assistant Grade-II, in the office of Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Development, Durg, District Durg (C.G.). VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, through : The Secretary, Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes Development Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.). The Commissioner/Upper Director, Tribal Development, Raipur (C.G.). /" 3. The Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Development, Durg, District Durg (C.G.). / 4. The Dealing Assistant Tribal Development, office of the Assistant Commissioner Tribal Development, Durg, District Durg (C.G.). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA v ^- '•'^. HiGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETSTION (S) N0.4080 OF 2009 Smt. Sanjana Raj RESPONDENTS Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition under Articies 226 of the Constltution of indla) Sing!e-Bench : Hon'bte Shri'Satish K< Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri Ashok Kumar Shykta and Shri Atui Ghosh, counsei for the Detitioner. Shri A.V. Sridhar, Panel Lawyer for the State. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on thjs 20th day of January. 2010) 1. With the consent of learned counset appearing for the parties, the petltion is heard fjnafly. 2. By this petition, the petltioner seeks a wrWdtrection to quash ie order dated 14-7-2009 (Annexure -P/10) whereby the petjtioner was not granted Jeave encashment for 389 days extraordinary Jeave. 3. Learned counsei appearing for the petrtioner submits that the petltloner, who was working as Asslstant Grade II in the office of Assistant Commissioner, Triba! Development, Durg, is entltled to increments in.the time scaSe applicable, if the odraordinary leave was granted on the basis of medjcai certifjcate produced foy the empSoyee.. Learned counsei further submits that the order impugned has been passed wJthout looking into the provisions. of 'the Fundamental Ruies 26 (b) (Jj), 4. j have heard Searned courssei appearjng for the parties, perused the pleadlngs and the documente appended thereto. 5. Fundamentai Rules 26 (b) (Jl) reads as uncler : [. 1 Gowrj "All Seave except extraordSnary ieave taksn otherwise ttian on rraedtcal certificate and the period of deputafjon out of Indla, shail count for increment Sn the tlme-scaje' applicabie to post in whlch a Govemment servant was officiating at the tlme he proceeded on leave or deputation oyt of india and wouid have contjnyed to. officiate, but for his proceedinQ on toave or deputation out of India : (Provided that the State Government may, Jn any case jn whlch it is certjfied that the extraordi.nary ieave was taken for any cause beyond the Govemment sen/ant's control or for prosecutlng higher sclentifsc^and technteal stydjes, dlrect that extraordinary leave sha!! b@ counted for incremenis under dause(i) or(Ji)." • S. Notice was issued on 6-8-2009 in presenceof learned counsei for the State, On 9-2-2009 on the request of learned State counset, as a iast opportunity, further three v^eeks tlme was granted, byt no reply has been fiied. It'appears that.the State Qovemmant is not keen to contest the matter. 7. !n view of foregotng, the impugned order dated 14-7-2009 (Annexure -P/10) to the exient of369 days extraordinary ieave'for the period from 24-6-2004 to 30-6-2005 is quashed. The Commlssioner, Department of Tribal Weifare, Raipur, is dlrected to consider the case of the petitioner afresh and pass proper orders, in accordance with law in view of the provisJons of Fundarysentai Rules26(b)(ii). 8. Wlth the aforesaid observations and directlons, the writ petition js disposed of. Sd/- SatishK.Agnihom Judge