Case at a Glance
A Senior Research Associate at CSIR-IMTECH, Chandigarh took maternity leave in 2021 and then applied for several spells of extraordinary leave without pay, which were forwarded to headquarters but never decided. She rejoined on 5 August 2022, but on 3 May 2023 CSIR terminated her services with effect from 31 July 2021. The Central Administrative Tribunal held that no termination can be issued from a back date, fixed the date of termination as 3 May 2023, and directed payment of salary from 5 August 2022 to that date within eight weeks. It rejected her claim for Child Care Leave for the leave period, holding that leave cannot be sanctioned ex post facto as of right.
The applicant, who holds a Ph.D., was selected as a Senior Research Associate under CSIR’s Scientists’ Pool Scheme and joined CSIR-IMTECH, Chandigarh on 25 June 2020 at a basic pay of ₹56,100 a month, with tenure granted year to year. She was granted 180 days’ maternity leave from 1 February 2021 to 30 July 2021. She then applied for five consecutive spells of extraordinary leave without pay covering 31 July 2021 to 4 August 2022; these were forwarded to the HRDG on 21 April 2022, but no decision was communicated to her.
She rejoined on 5 August 2022. In February 2023 the HRDG sought justification and medical certificates, and by an Office Memorandum dated 3 May 2023 her services were terminated with effect from 31 July 2021. A committee later upheld the termination. Before the Tribunal she sought quashing of the termination, salary up to 24 June 2023, and Child Care Leave under Rule 43-C of the CCS (Leave) Rules, 1972 for the leave period. CSIR argued that the post was a contractual fellowship, that extraordinary leave was never approved in advance, and that, under the DoPT OM of 18 November 2008, Child Care Leave cannot be demanded as of right.
The Key Question Before the Court
Can an employer terminate an employee’s services with retrospective effect after leaving her leave applications undecided and allowing her to rejoin and work?
An Undecided Leave Application Cannot Support a Back-Dated Termination
The applicant relied on CAT decisions in Arun Kumar Sharma v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Indira Vinod v. Commissioner, KVS, which hold that a leave application sent through proper channels must be dealt with fairly and that an unanswered application is not the same as absence without leave. The Tribunal found that the respondents “could not decide the application for EOL without pay forwarded through Email” and that a timely decision would have avoided the dispute altogether.
On that footing, the Tribunal held that termination from a back date “is not sustainable in the eyes of law.” The termination could take effect only from the date of the termination letter, 3 May 2023, and the applicant had to be paid for the period after she rejoined. At the same time, the Tribunal refused her claim to Child Care Leave for the extraordinary leave period: “No leave is a matter right and thus cannot be claimed to be sanctioned ex-post-facto.” It also held that an entry-exit register showing her in the building on 16 May 2023 did not prove she was working that day.
What the Court Actually Held
- A termination order cannot be given retrospective effect; the OM of 3 May 2023 was quashed to the extent it terminated services from 31 July 2021.
- The date of termination will be 3 May 2023, the date of the termination letter.
- CSIR must pay salary and emoluments from 5 August 2022 to the date of the termination letter within eight weeks; the extraordinary leave period is treated as continuity of service without pay.
- Child Care Leave cannot be claimed as of right or sanctioned ex post facto for the extraordinary leave period; no costs were awarded.
Why This Judgment Matters
- It protects employees, including contractual staff, from back-dated termination orders that wipe out months of work after the employer failed to decide their leave requests.
- It puts the onus on employers to decide leave applications in time rather than act on them years later.
- It also marks a limit: leave such as Child Care Leave must be applied for and sanctioned, and cannot be claimed after the event.
What Should Advocates Take Away From the Judgment?
For Employees
- Apply for leave in writing through proper channels and keep proof that the application was forwarded.
- If your employer does not decide a leave request, that inaction can be relied on if you are later treated as absent.
- Child Care Leave must be specifically applied for; it cannot be claimed later for a period taken as extraordinary leave.
For Counsel
- Challenge retrospective termination orders as unsustainable; the Tribunal fixed termination at the date of the order.
- Rely on CAT precedents that an unanswered leave application is not unauthorised absence.
- Separate the claim for salary after rejoining from claims for leave already availed.
Key Takeaways
- CSIR’s termination of the scientist from 31 July 2021 was quashed as a back-dated order.
- Her termination takes effect from 3 May 2023.
- Salary from 5 August 2022 to 3 May 2023 must be paid within eight weeks.
- Her claim for Child Care Leave for the leave period was rejected.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can an employer terminate service with retrospective effect?
In this case, no. The CAT Chandigarh held that no termination of services can be issued from a back date and fixed the termination as effective from the date of the order, 3 May 2023.
What happens to salary for the period after rejoining?
The Tribunal directed CSIR to pay salary and emoluments from 5 August 2022, when she rejoined, to the date of the termination letter, within eight weeks of receiving a certified copy.
Can Child Care Leave be claimed later for a period already taken as leave?
No. The Tribunal held that no leave is a matter of right and it cannot be claimed to be sanctioned ex post facto, so her Child Care Leave claim failed.
Conclusion
The Tribunal took a balanced view. CSIR could not keep a scientist’s leave applications undecided, let her return to work, and then erase her service from a date nearly two years earlier. But she also could not convert extraordinary leave into Child Care Leave after the fact.
Practical takeaway: Employers must decide leave requests promptly; a termination order can operate only from its own date, not from the start of an undecided leave.
For more judgments, legal opinions and case analysis, visit courtkutchehry.com