IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 17TH DECEMBER 2009 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 13199 of 2009(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ MRS.P.C.LILLY KUTTY, U.D.CLERK (ON LEAVE), CORPORATION OF COCHIN, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.A.JALEEL RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. CORPORATION OF COCHIN, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CORPORATION OFFICE, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF COCHIN, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.NANDAKUAMAR FOR R3 & R4 SRI.S.RAMESH BABU, SC FOR R1 AND R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.13199/09 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF GO(MS) NO.235/99/LSGD DT 10.12.99 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DT 12.8.2004 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DT 30.10.2004 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT THROUGH THE 2ND RESPONDENT. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 13199 OF 2009 (T) ===================== Dated this the 17th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is a UD Clerk in the Kochi Corporation. Initially she availed of leave without allowance to join her husband at abroad for a period of 15 years. That period expired in 1999 and leave was extended by a further period of five years by Ext.P1 order. Petitioner states that on expiry of the leave, by Exts.P2 and P3 letters, she requested for permission to rejoin duty. It is stated that there was no response to this request and therefore she could not rejoin duty. Complaining that she is not allowed to rejoin duty the writ petition is filed praying for orders enabling the petitioner to rejoin duty. 2. Corporation on its part submits that after 2004, when the leave extended by Ext.P1 order expired, petitioner did not report for duty. It is stated that the petitioner should get orders from the 3rd respondent to seek readmission to the service of the Corporation. 3. However, under the Rules, if on expiry of the maximum leave period of 20 years, an employee does not return for duty, WPC 13199/09 :2 : the employer is bound to initiate disciplinary action. In this case, such a course of action has not been adopted by the Corporation so far, which means that the petitioner still continues on the rolls of the Corporation. If that be the situation, petitioner is entitled to seek readmission, which the Corporation is bound to consider. But, however any such order shall be without prejudice to the right of the Corporation to initiate appropriate action in terms of the Rules. Writ petition is therefore disposed of directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to rejoin duty, but however, without prejudice to their right to initiate appropriate action for the alleged unauthorised absence on her part. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp