IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 2ND SEPTEMBER 2010 / 11TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 24284 of 2010(I) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- DR.NIMSHA MAJID ASST. SUGEON, COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTRE CHEMPUMPURAM, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SMT.S.MUMTAZ SHUMSUDDIN SMT.MAHESWARI D.L. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT HEALTH & FAMILY DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.ARAVINDA KUMAR BABU.T.K. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KL. S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 24284 of 2010 ================== Dated this the 2nd day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is an Assistant Surgeon in the Health Services Department of the Government of Kerala. The petitioner availed leave without allowances for taking up employment abroad with effect from 14.9.2001 which expired on 14.9.2006. The petitioner claims to have filed an application for extention of leave for 5 years with effect from 14.9.2006, on 1.7.2006, 2 months prior to the date expiry of the already sanctioned leave. According to the petitioner, without passing orders on the application for extention of leave, the first respondent issued Ext.P4 show cause notice, to which the petitioner filed Ext.P5 reply, despite which, the petitioners service have been terminated for unauthorised absence by Ext.P6 order dated 9.6.2008. Petitioner challenges Ext.P6 order on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice, in so far as the petitioner had not been afforded an opportunity of being heard before passing that order. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. The writ petition is liable to be dismissed for more grounds W.P.(C).No. 24284 of 2010 2 than one. First of all, Ext.P6 order is dated 9.6.2008. The petitioner has not chosen to challenge the same within a reasonable time. Petitioner has also no satisfactory explanation for the delay of more than 2 years, except stating that the petitioner was not in station which cannot be accepted a valid reason. As such the petitioner is guilty of unexplained delay and laches in challenging Ext.P6 appropriately. Further petitioner has no case that the extention of leave applied for has been sanctioned. It is settled law that a person can proceed on leave without allowance only after getting the leave applied for, sanctioned. As such the petitioner is unauthorisedly alert from leave. Despite the same, by Ext.P4 notice the petitioner was given an opportunity of joining service within 15 days from the date of the said notice. Petitioner has no case that petitioner has not received the notice. That notice was dated 13.8.2007. Petitioner did not chose to rejoin duty within 15 days or even till today. In the above circumstances a hearing of the petitioner, even if she has not been granted such an opportunity, would not make any difference at all, in so far as there is no doubt whatsoever that the petitioner is unauthorisedly absent from W.P.(C).No. 24284 of 2010 3 duty. In the above circumstances there is no merit in the writ petition. Accordingly the same is dismissed. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE mns