IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 11TH JANUARY 2010 / 21TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 34521 of 2005(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------- P.CHANDRAN, S/O.B.PITHAMBARAN, AGED 47 YEARS, WORKING AS PEON, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER FOR KHADI & VILLAGE INDUSTRIES, M.G.ROAD, P.B.NO.198, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. KHADI VILLAGE, INDUSTRIES COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHEIF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KHADI COMMISSION, IRCA ROAD, VILE PARLE(WEST), MUMBAI-400 056. 2. THE DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER FOR KHADI & VILLAGE, INDUSTRIES, M.G.ROAD, P.B.NO.198, M.G.ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.P.N.PURUSHOTHAMA KAIMAL FOR R2 SRI.P.N.PURUSHOTHAMA KAIMAL FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DTD.23.6.2005. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DTD.27.5.2005. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LEAVE APPLICATION DTD.27.7.2005. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LEAVE APPLICATION DTD.3.8.2005. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.5.8.2005 ISSUED BY THE ASST.DIRECTOR OF THE IST RESPONDENT. EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF REPN.DTD.8.10.2005. EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF REPN.DTD.10.10.2005. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R2(A) A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FORM FOR LEAVE OR FOR EXTENSION OF LEAVE FROM 8.12.2004 TO 25.1.2005. EXT.R2(B) A TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DTD.8.12.2004 ISSUED BY DR.K.MADHAVA DAS, AYURVEDIC CLINIC, POWDIKONAM. EXT.R2(C) A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.27.2.2005 SUBMITTED BY THE PETR. TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.R2(D) A TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO NO.SOK/EST/69/2004-05 DTD.21.3.2005 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.R2(E) A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.11.4.2005 BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.R2(F) A TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DTD.9.4.2005. EXT.R2(G) A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.26.5.2005 BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.R2(H) A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.22.6.2005 BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.R2(I) A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.27.7.2005 BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.R2(J) A TRUE COPY OF TH EMEDICAL CERTIFICATE DTD.8.12.2004 ISSUED BY DR.A ABDUL SALAM OF GOVT.AYURVEDA COLLEGE, TRIVANDRUM. EXT.R2(K) A TRUE COPY OF THE FITNESS CERTIFICATE DTD.27.7.2005. EXT.R2(L) A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.3.8.2005 BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.R2(M) A TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DTD.27.5.2005 ISSUED BY DR.MADURI DEVI OF GOVT.AYURVEDA COLLEGE, TRIVANDRUM. EXTR2(N) TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DTD.23.6.2005 ISSUED BY DR.A.ABDUL SALAM. EXT.R2(O) A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.SOK/EST/69/2005-2006 DTD. 18.10.2005 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE DIRECTOR (ADMINISTRATION KHADI & VILLAGE INDUSTRIES COMMISSION, MUMBAI. EXT.R2(P) A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.ADM.1/NGR/TRIVANDRUM/104/05-2005 DTD.9.11.2005 ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR (ADMINSITRATION) KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES COMMISSION, MUMBAI TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.R2(Q) A TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO NO.SOK/EST/69/2005-2006 DTD. 13.12.2005 ISSUED BY DY.DIRECATOR,KVIC, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXT.R2(R) A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.G3/11569/2005 dtd.29.8.2005 ISSUED BY DIRECTOR, INDIAN SYSTEMS OF MEDICINE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TO THE ASST.DIRECTOR, KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES COMMISSION, TRIVANDRUM. EXT.R2(S) A TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO NO.SOK/LEGAL-I/W0(C)34521/2005 DTD. 6.2.2006 ISSUE DBY 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.R2T A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.20.2.2006 BY THE PETR. TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. TRUE COPY P.A.TO JUDGE K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.34521 of 2005 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of January, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner was working as a Peon in the Office of the Commissioner for Khadi and Village Industries at Thiruvananthapuram. According to the petitioner, he had suffered a motor accident in the year 2004 and was thrown on the road forcefully. Consequently, after some time, he began suffering severe pain below the hip region and both of his legs. The pain made him immobile and he had to be under prolonged treatment at the Government Ayurveda Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram. He was advised complete bed rest till his treatment was over. Therefore, he was not attending the office. It is his case that while under treatment, he had submitted leave application on medical grounds through post. After joining duty, he submitted a request for regularising his leave. It is the case of the petitioner WPC No.34521/2005 2 that though he had made representations to the authorities seeking appropriate orders on his applications, no orders have so far been passed. 2. On behalf of the second respondent, a counter affidavit has been filed producing Exts.R2(b) and R2(j) Medical Certificates submitted by the petitioner. According to the counsel for the second respondent, the two Medical Certificates are issued by two separate medical practitioners relating to the same period during which the petitioner was alleged to have been under treatment. According to him, the Medical Certificates created serious suspicion regarding the genuineness of the case put forward by the petitioner and it was therefore that his case was not considered favourably by the second respondent. In the above circumstances, he was directed to produce the list of medicines and the bill for purchase of medicines which were not produced by him. Though the above facts are in controversy, Exts.P6 and P7 representations submitted by the petitioner are still WPC No.34521/2005 3 pending before the second respondent and no orders have been passed thereon till date. The question as to the genuineness of the Medical Certificates produced by the petitioner cannot be gone into in exercise of the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Since Exts.P6 and P7 representations are pending before the second respondent, the above aspects can be gone into by the second respondent. 3. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P6 representation as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after giving an opportunity to the petitioner also to be heard. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE css/