IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 21ST MAY 2010 / 31ST VAISAKHA 1932 WP(C).No. 12113 of 2009(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- JOHN JOSEPH, FOREST GUARD, KOTHAMANGALAM FOREST RANGE, KOTHAMANGALAM - 686 691. BY ADV. SMT.P.V.ASHA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF FOREST AND WILD LIFE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS (ADMINISTRATION), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. MR.P.NANDAKUMAR, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.12113/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 11/11/04 OF PETITIONER ALONG WITH MEDICAL CERTIFICATE, POSTAL RECEIPT AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT. P1(a) : COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 11/12/04 OF PETITIONER ALONG WITH MEDICAL CERTIFICATE. P1(b) : COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 01/02/06 OF PETITIONER ALONG WITH MEDICAL CERTIFICTE. P2 : COPY OF THE FITNESS CERTIFICATE DATED 20/02/06 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. P2(a) : COPY OF SERVICE ORDER NO.3/06 DATED 20/02/06. P3 : COPY OF G.O.(Rt.) NO.542/06/F& WLD DATED 20/12/06. P4 : COPY OF REVIEW PETITION DATED 15/05/07 TO R1. P5 : COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 30/06/08 TO R1. P6 : COPY OF G.O.(Rt.) NO.414/07/FOREST DATED 24/07/07. P7 : COPY OF APPLICATION SUBMITTED ON 02/12/2009 OF PETITIONER. P7(a) : COPY OF REPLY DATED 08/12/2009. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.12113 of 2009 (H) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 21st day of May, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner's grievance is regarding Ext.P3, where, he was allowed Leave Without Allowance for 467 days, but however clarifying that it should not count for increment, grade and for such other benefits. 2. According to the petitioner, he applied for medical leave by Ext.P1 enclosing medical certificate and therefore the condition as above is illegal and is opposed to the Rules. Reliance is also placed on the judgment of this Court in Pushpangadan v. State of Kerala 2002 (3) KLT 519). However, it is also his case that despite having made representations, evidenced by Exts.P4 & P5, seeking review of Ext.P3, there has not been any response. 3. However, learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that the Government has received Ext.P5, a separate file has been opened and the claim of the petitioner is being reconsidered. 4. Now that the Government is seized of the issue, I do not WP(C) No.12113/2009 -2- think it necessary for this Court to enter into the merits of the controversy. Having regard to the submission of the learned Government Pleader that Ext.P5 is being examined by the Government, it is directed that the 1st respondent shall consider the same in accordance with the Rules and pass orders thereon. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, six weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg