DC SHARMA KESHAV RAM Vs. STATE OF HP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE order dated 29.4.2008 in OA No. 1542 of 1993 of the erstwhile Tribunal is under challenge. THE applicant approached the Tribunal aggrieved by the denial of commuted leave for 10th, 21st and 26th of February, 1992, 9th April, 1992 and 4th, 13th and 27th March, 1993. According to the petitioner, these are the dates the petitioner had travelled to PGI Chandigarh from Hamirpur for the medical check up and hence those dates should also be counted for the purpose of granting commuted leave on medical certificate. THE Tribunal after adverting to Rule 30 of the CCS (Leave) Rules rejected the case of the petitioner holding that the period for travel is not covered by Rule 30.

(2.) THE very meaning of commuted leave is commuting of half pay leave. Such leave is permissible only on medical certificate. When one commuted leave is granted, two half pay leave is debited from the credit account under Rule 29 of the Leave Rules based on the medical certificate produced by the petitioner. THE Doctor has not specifically clarified on the medical certificate, except for Annexure A-10, that the journey days should also come in the medical certificate. As far as 9.4.1992 is concerned, it is certainly covered by Annexure A-10, certificate of the Doctor. THE Department is justified in declining the grant of commuted leave, so long as the certificate does not cover the dates of journey. But it is not in dispute that the journey is to be undertaken from Hamirpur to reach PGI, Chandigarh. THE petitioner should have requested the Doctor to include that period also, as has been done in the case of Annexure A-10. But according to the petitioner, sometimes Doctors do not entertain such requests. In Himachal Pradesh, one must be quite aware of the time required for the travel. THE travel of the petitioner from Hamirpur to Chandigarh on those dates is only for treatment. THE petitioner is now 76 years of age. THErefore, it is only in the interest of all concerned to give quietus to the whole dispute. 9th, 10th, 21st and 26th February, 1992 and 4th, 13th and 27th March, 1993, the petitioner shall be granted commuted leave, as a special case and the period shall be regularized accordingly. THE salary withheld for these days shall be released to the petitioner within a month from the date of production of a copy of this judgment by the petitioner before the respondents/competent authority. We make it clear that this judgment is in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and it shall not be treated as a precedent.