IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH JULY 2008 / 25TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 15422 of 2008(J) PETITIONER: E.K. SONY, SENIOR RESEARCH FELLOW (CONTRACTUAL), REGIONAL AGRICULTURAL STATION, AMBALAVAYAL. ECHARANKUDY HOUSE, POOMALA P.O., SULTHAN BATHERRY, WAYANAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.G.G.MANOJ RESPONDENTS: 1. ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, REGIONAL AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH STATION, AMBALAVAYAL, WAYANAD DISTRICT. 2. REGISTRAR, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, MANNUTHY, THRISSUR 3. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, KERALA AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH STATION, AMBALAVAYAL, WAYANAD DISTRICT. STANDING COUNSEL FOR AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY SRI.RANJITH THAMPAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 15422 OF 2008 J -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th July, 2008 JUDGMENT As per Ext.P1 dated 29.9.2006, the petitioner was selected for appointment as Senior Research Fellow (Contractual) on a consolidated salary of Rs.7,000/- per month during the period of project or on termination of the post whichever is earlier. The petitioner states that while working as Senior Research Fellow at the Regional Agricultural Station, Ambalavayal, she applied for maternity leave with effect from 23.4.2007. It is stated that on the expiration of the maternity leave of 135 days, the petitioner reported for duty on 5.9.2007. The allegation is that the petitioner was not allowed to rejoin duty. Ext.P2 representation was submitted by the petitioner on 7.9.2007 to the Registrar of the University. Ext.P3 order of termination dated 13.8.2007 was issued by the Kerala Agricultural University, terminating the service of the petitioner. In Ext.P3 it is stated that maternity leave would be available only if the employees' have completed more than one year of service in the post, as per Appendix VIII of Part I of the Kerala Service Rules. On the ground that the petitioner failed to rejoin duty within the stipulated time, her service was terminated. Ext.P3 is challenged in this Writ Petition. There is also a prayer for the issue of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order, commanding the respondents to take back the petitioner into service as Senior Research Fellow. W.P.(C) NO.15422 OF 2008 J :: 2 :: 2. The engagement of the petitioner was contractual. It was liable to be terminated in the manner indicated in Ext.P1. On the ground that the petitioner failed to rejoin duty within the stipulated time, Ext.P3 order was issued. 3. In the statement filed by the respondents, termination of the service of the petitioner is justified and it is stated that she is not even entitled to get maternity leave. The case of the petitioner that she rejoined duty after 135 days of availing maternity leave is denied by the University. No material is placed before Court to come to a conclusion that the case put forward by the petitioner is liable to be accepted. I do not find any ground to interfere with Ext.P3 order. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is entitled to get at least the benefit of maternity leave. The Standing Counsel for the University submitted that the maternity leave was not, in fact, granted, since she had not completed one year of service as provided in the Kerala Service Rules. The statement deals with elaborately the grounds on which the petitioner is not entitled to get maternity leave. 5. On an over all consideration of the facts and circumstances of W.P.(C) NO.15422 OF 2008 J :: 3 :: the case, I am of the view that the question whether the petitioner should be granted the benefit of maternity leave is a matter to be considered by the University. The petitioner would be free to make a detailed representation to the University. The University shall consider the representation favourably and pass appropriate orders in that regard. It is made clear that this case need not be treated as a precedent by the University and that appropriate orders could be passed in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. If the petitioner makes a representation within a period of two weeks from today, the University shall dispose of the same within a period of one month thereafter. Petitioner submits that she waives the right to be heard in the matter. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/