MRINALINI PANDEY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Diwakar Upadhyay, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. A.K. Mehta, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Indian School of Mines University.

(2.) The petitioner has prayed in this writ petition for quashing the order dated 24.07.2012 passed by the Registrar, Indian School of Mines University, Dhanbad whereby an application for Child Care Leave from 07.07.2012 to 18.10.2012 is rejected.

(3.) Mr. Diwakar Upadhyay, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled for Child Care Leave in view of Rule 43-C of the Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1972. She applied for 82 days of Child Care Leave which was rejected by Annexure-6. Drawing the attention of this Court to the rules he submits that in the impugned order the respondents have admitted that the petitioner is entitled for Child Care Leave but inspite of that, the said benefit was not extended to the petitioner. He further submits that in the impugned order the another reason is said that the contribution to the Department in the last two academic sessions was dismal by the petitioner and on these grounds the said leave was not allowed to the petitioner. He submits that the petitioner is entitled for that leave with effect from 07.07.2012 to 18.10.2012 and she has filed the application in the format of the University which is contained in Annexure-5. Mr. Diwakar Upadhyay, the learned counsel for the petitioner has relied in the case of "Kakali Ghosh vs. Chief Secretary, Andaman and Nicobar Administration and Ors." of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in Civil Appeal No.4506 of 2014 which was disposed of by order dated 15.04.2014. He refers to paragraph no.12 of the said judgment, which is quoted hereinbelow :