IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 29TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 30203 of 2008(U) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ DR.K.A.PAIUS, KUNNATHUPARAMBIL AMALAGIRI P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.THAMPAN THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY HEALTH DEPARTMENT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES, HEALTH DEPARTMENT, TRIVANDRUM. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. ANTONY MUKKATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.30203/2008 U APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE PROSPECTUS. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE MEMO NO.B2/4700/06/DME DTD. 20/05/06. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A1-10972/2006/DMOH.EKM. DTD. 1/06/2006. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE APPLICATION DTD. 18/09/2006. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.A1-10972/2006 DTD. 26/09/2006. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE ENDORSEMENT N.DIS./MC5/77007/06/DHS DTD. 5/10/2006. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE REPRESENATATION DTD. 27/11/2006. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.MC5-94934/06/DHS DTD.4/12/2006. EXT.P9: COPY OF THE APPLICATION DTD. 12/03/2007. EXT.P10: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.L.DIS.MC5/95426/07/DHS DTD. 26/11/2007. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.30203/2008-U ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 18th day of February, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is at present doing Post Graduate Course in Medicine as service candidate in the Kottayam Medical College for the course of M.D.General Medicine 2006-2009. He was selected for the course while he was a Medical Officer in the Government Hospital, Narakkal in the year 2006. Ext.P2 dated 20/05/2006, is the memo regarding his selection to the course. By Ext.P3 he was further intimated that he should apply for leave/deputation through proper channel. By Ext.P4 he presented the application for sanction of deputation. His application was forwarded through proper channel by the District Medical Officer on 26/09/2006, that is evidenced by Ext.P5. The second respondent by Ext.P6 returned the original application stating that he is not eligible for deputation benefit. Again he resubmitted the application for deputation, which is evidence by Ext.P7 to the Director of Health Services, Thiruvananthapuram. The second respondent has taken the stand that as per the existing rules, he is not eligible for deputation benefit. Accordingly, all the documents in W.P.(C) No.30203/2008 -:2:- original were returned. Ext.P9 is the representation submitted by the petitioner before the Government. 2. The competent authority to take a decision in the matter is the Government. But on getting the representation, which was submitted through proper channel, the second respondent through Ext.P10 informed the petitioner that he is not eligible for deputation benefit as he has not enough prospective service to serve the Government after P.G.Course. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the petitioner had approached the Government, the Government itself is the competent authority to take a decision in the matter. It was premature on the part of the second respondent to reject the application filed before the Government stating that he is not eligible. There is a deficient period of one month and five days, as far as the petitioner is concerned. By Ext.P9 he had requested the Government to condone the same and grant the benefit. It is for the Government to take a decision in the matter. All that the second respondent required was to forward the application of the petitioner to the Government. I find much force in the above submission. 3. Therefore, Ext.P10 is set aside. The petitioner will resubmit the documents to the Government for consideration without delay. On receipt W.P.(C) No.30203/2008 -:3:- of the same, appropriate orders shall be passed on Ext.P9 by the Government within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms