IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.RAY MONDAY, THE 21ST MARCH 2011 / 30TH PHALGUNA 1932 WA.No. 351 of 2011() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.34007/2009 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER ------------------------ T.P.GEETHA, AGED 50, W/O.WILSON, NEEDLE WORK TEACHER, S.N.D.P., H.S.S., UDAYAMPEROOR, NADAKAVU P.O., ERNAKULAM AND RESIDING AT GEETHA BHAVAN, PUTHIYAKAVU, TRIPUNITHURA - 682 301. BY ADV. SRI.B.RAMACHANDRAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ATTINGAL. 3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ERNAKULAM. 4. THE GENERAL MANAGER, S.N.D.P. YOGAM SCHOOLS, P.B.NO.512, KOLLAM. G.P. SMT.T.B.RAMANI FOR R1 TO R3 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & BHABANI PRASAD RAY, JJ. .................................................................... Writ Appeal No.351 of 2011 .................................................................... Dated this the 21st day of March, 2011. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. The issue raised pertains to appellant's claim for medical leave for a long period of five years. Appellant's case is that all the leave applications have been accompanied by medical certificates. Even though leave is approved for part of the period, Government declined to grant medical leave for remaining period for want of evidence. The Government doubted the genuineness of the leave because it was applied for and obtained when appellant was given transfer from one place to a distant place. The learned Single Judge agreed with the Government stating that without a Medical Board examination and without meticulous evidence about the disease and treatment appellant is not entitled to leave. We are in complete agreement with the view of the Government confirmed by the learned Single Judge because leave itself is applied for when appellant was transferred from one place to a far distant place. Therefore, bonafides was rightly doubted by the 2 Government and in the absence of clear evidence about treatment, medical certificate and Medical Board examination and confirmation appellant is not entitled to leave on medical grounds. Writ Appeal is dismissed confirming the judgment of the learned Single Judge giving option to the appellant to establish eligibility in terms of Government's directions. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge BHABANI PRASAD RAY Judge pms