IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2008 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 15055 of 2008(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ DR. VASUDEVAN V., ASSISTANT SURGEON (HG)(ON LEAVE), 'GRACE', 33/5125 A, CHEVARAMBALAM P.O., CALICUT-673 017. BY ADV. SMT.SHAHNA KARTHIKEYAN SRI.V.ARUN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER OF HEALTH, KOZHIKODE. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.M.R.SREELATHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).15055/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 26th day of May, 2008 JUDGMENT While continuing as a Tutor in Anatomy in Medical College, Alappuzha, petitioner joined the Department of Health Services in 1987 as Assistant Surgeon. While continuing in the Primary Health Centre at Perambra, petitioner applied for Half Pay Leave for a period from 30.9.1999 to 16.4.2000, which was sanctioned under Ext.P1. While on leave, petitioner applied for leave without allowance for a period of five years for taking up alternate employment, as per Ext.P2. Apparently, though the District Medical Officer of Health had recommended the sanction of leave, second respondent, the Director of Health Services, as evidenced by Ext.P5 dated 22.5.2000, declined to recommend the petitioner’s application for leave. Therefore, petitioner was not granted the same. Petitioner filed Ext.P6 representation dated 24.6.2000 before the Director. But thereafter, he did not pursue the same. Petitioner did not join duty and he was not sanctioned leave as sought for under Ext.P2. W.P.(C).15055/2008 2 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner refers to Ext.P8 which is a communication received from the second respondent requiring the petitioner to intimate the Institution where he intends to work. By Ext.P9, Petitioner replied that he only intended to take up self employment at Perambra. Ext.P5 dated 22.5.2000 is subsequent to Exts.P8 and P9. 3. Writ petition has now been filed eight years later taking note of the fact that the petitioner is due to retire on 31.5.2008, seeking a direction to the respondents to permit the petitioner to re-join duty. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no disciplinary proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner for unauthorized absence. Therefore petitioner has a right to re-join duty, it is contended. 4. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. Ext.P7 dated 3.4.2008 is W.P.(C).15055/2008 3 an application filed by the petitioner before the Director of Health Services seeking permission to re-join duty as Assistant Surgeon. 5. In my view, petitioner is not entitled to a direction as such. After all it is admitted that the petitioner was not granted leave without allowance for taking up alternate employment. Government servant is not entitled to assume that leave will be granted and is not entitled to remain out of service either for self employment or taking up alternate employment unless leave has been sanctioned in terms of appendix 12A of Part-III of the KSR. In the present case, petitioner was served with Ext.P5 wherein the Director of Health Services had expressly declined permission to recommend the petitioner’s application for leave. In the circumstances, petitioner’s leave has not been sanctioned. But he nevertheless did not either re-join duty or pursue the matter further within a reasonable time. Petitioner is now not entitled to re-join duty W.P.(C).15055/2008 4 ignoring the absence for a period of more than eight years. 6. For all these reasons, I do not find my way to issue any direction at this stage to the respondent. Writ petition is bereft of merit and the same is dismissed. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs