IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No 13058 of 2009 1. DR. ARJUN KUMAR S/O DR. HARI KRISHNA ROY MUHALLA BHAGWANPUR CHATTI, P.S. BHAGWANPUR, TOWN AND DIST-MUZAFFARPUR Versus 1. PATNA UNIVERSITY, PATNA THROUGH ITS REGISTRAR 2. VICE CHANCELLOR PATNA UNIVERSITY, PATNA 3. REGISTRAR PATNA UNIVERSITY, PATNA 4. PRINCIPAL PATNA COLLEGE, PATNA UNIVERSITY, PATNA ----------- 5 25.06.2010 Heard the parties and with their consent, the writ petition is being disposed of at this stage itself. Petitioner is a permanent Lecturer in Patna University in the Department of English. He applied for extraordinary leave without pay. The reason was that he had got a teaching assignment in a University in Libya. Having not got any response from the Vice Chancellor, though the leave was recommended by Head of the Department and the Principal, this writ petition was filed. By interim order, subject to final orders of the Vice Chancellor, petitioner was permitted to proceed for the said assignment. A counter affidavit has been filed and a petition for vacating the interim order has been filed on behalf of the University on the ground that pursuant to a policy decision taken by the University, it has been decided that no extraordinary leave would be granted to the teaching staff for taking up further studies and/or teaching assignment outside the University because of paucity of Teachers. Leave already granted were not being extended in the interest of academics. What is the interest of academics is not explained. It is appreciated that leave is not to be 2 granted as a matter of right but at the same time refusal cannot be arbitrary or unguided. There have to be valid grounds for refusing leave. The very fact that the University Statute provides for extraordinary leave, it has to be assumed that the Statute is not mere ornamental to be exercised at the whims and caprice of the Vice Chancellor. It has a purpose. It could be refused only on valid, legal and sustainable grounds. Petitioner has shown that academics would not suffer by granting leave to him. By way of illustration, Mr Ganesh Prasad Singh, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, states that there are 142 students in the College in the English Department. There are seven Lecturers. If one is granted extraordinary leave, heavens would not fall. Be that as it may, by virtue of interim order, petitioner was allowed to proceed on extraordinary leave and Shri Ganesh Prasad Singh, learned Senior Counsel submits that petitioner, on completing his foreign assignment, is returning to India about 02nd week of July, 2010 to rejoin his duties. That being so, the refusal to grant extraordinary leave has now become meaningless. It is not disputed that the order of refusal to grant extraordinary leave was communicated to the petitioner after he had left for foreign assignment pursuant to interim orders of this Court. As petitioner is now completing his foreign assignment and joining back the College, the whole matter becomes infructuous. The period, during which petitioner was absent from the University, would be treated as extraordinary leave without pay with all such consequences as it entails. The Vice Chancellor must clearly lay down the policy guidelines for a transparent system for grant of extraordinary leave so that all persons 3 concerned would know well in advance whether they are entitled to seek such leave or not. As one would put it, predictability of a decision is the requirement of the day and unpredictability or uncertainty would be arbitrary. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. M.E.H./ (Navaniti Prasad Singh)