IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 7TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 16TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 24481 of 2009(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- DR.K.P.RAMKUMARAN,ASSTISTANT SURGEON (RTD.), 'INDUS', SKV COLLEGE ROAD, KANATTUKARA, THRICHUR-11. BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, THIRUVANANTHPAURAM. BY GP ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).24481/2009 -------------------- Dated this the 7th day of September, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner joined service as Assistant Surgeon in the year 1981, pursuant to the advice of the PSC. His probation was declared on 6.11.1987. He availed of leave in two spells one from 10.10.1997 to 17.10.2000 on medical grounds and the second one from 24.10.2000 to 24.11.2004, latter being for study purposes. Apparently formal orders sanctioning leave were not issued at any point of time, though the petitioner was prosecuting his request for orders in this regard. In the meanwhile, petitioner retired from service on 28.2.2005. As evidenced by Ext.P11, Government directed that the period from 10.10.1997 to 17.10.2000, otherwise liable to be treated as unauthorized absence, be regularized as non-duty without forfeiture of past service and the period from 24.10.2000 to 28.2.2005 be regularized as leave without allowances for study purpose, under Rule 88 of Part-I of Kerala Service Rules, but subject to condition that the latter period will not be counted for increment, higher grade pension or accumulation of W.P.(C).24481/09 2 Earned Leave. By Ext.P12, retirement benefits due to the petitioner have been sanctioned reckoning 14 years as qualifying service. It is essentially Exts.P11 and P12 that the petitioner is aggrieved by. Petitioner has approached the Government seeking a re-consideration of the manner in which the aforementioned two spells of leave are to be counted, vide Ext.P13. Same is pending consideration before the Government. Hence the writ petition praying for appropriate reliefs. 2. I heard learned Government Pleader also. It is a fact that formal orders sanctioning leave were not issued in the case of the petitioner for both the aforementioned spells of absence. But the manner in which the period has been decided to be treated, has been decided without prior notice to the petitioner. In the circumstances, it is appropriate that the petitioner's contention as contained in Ext.P13 be considered by the Government. 1st respondent shall take a decision on Ext.P13 treating it as a plea for reconsideration of Ext.P11 and after hearing the petitioner, W.P.(C).24481/09 3 orders shall be passed within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Copy of the writ petition along with the copy of the judgment shall be produced by the petitioner before the 1st respondent. Writ petition is disposed of as above. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs