UNION OF INDIA Vs. J.R.DHIMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TO cover up their lapses, the Railway authorities have come out with, if we may use the expression, a very funny policy guideline dated January 13, 1993. If Indian Railways misplace and lose the Service Book and the Leave Account of a Railway servant, the policy prescribes that Leave Account would be regenerated, with reference to such record which may be available, and extrapolating the data generated for a given period to the entire period for which the leave account is not available.

(2.) NOW , from a scientific approach, there is no rationale in the policy decision for the reason a Government servant is not presumed to be falling sick repeatedly or taking repetitive leave merely because in a particular year, for a particular duration, he has fallen sick or takes leave. Let us illustrate with a notional example. 'A' joins service on January 01, 2000. He is aged 25 years. He is a bachelor. Finding a match and getting married on January 01, 2003, and for purposes of marriage and honeymoon 'A' takes leave for 15 days. Leave record for the previous or the succeeding years cannot be re-generated with reference to 'A' taking leave for his marriage. The reason is obvious. Nobody gets married every year. Further, this very 'A' is blessed with a child in the year 2005 and at the time of birth takes paternity leave of 15 days. This period of paternity leave cannot be a representative sample to notionally determine leave account by 'A' in the preceding and succeeding years.

(3.) SUFFICE would it be to state that a sample has to be representative of the whole. If a sample is not representative of the whole, it would be sample improperly so called and not a sample properly so called.