AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Antony Dominic, J.—By Ext.P1 order dated 15.12.1990, petitioner was appointed as Junior Clerk under the 3rd respondent Co- operative Bank. The appointment order specified the probationary period of one year. According to the petitioner during the probationary period, with effect from 24.10.1991, she availed of maternity leave for 90 days. Excluding the aforesaid 90 days period, her eligibility for declaration of probation was considered and her probation was declared with effect from 1.5.1992. Accordingly, her date of increment was also got postponed and it is on that basis the Petitioner has drawing her emoluments since then. She refers to Ext.P2, her service book to support this contention.
According to the petitioner, on 15.12.1990 itself yet another person Mr. Ayyappan was appointed as Junior Clerk and his probation was declared on completion of one year from the date of initial appointment and he is drawing pay and other allowances on that basis. Her representation for reckoning the maternity leave period and rectifying the anomalies including pay revision emoluments did not yield any result and it is in these circumstances the writ petition is filed.
Although by order dated 30.3.2009, notice was ordered to respondents 3 to 5 and despite service, there is no appearance on their behalf.
Counsel mainly relies on Ext.P10 Government Order, which provides that the period of maternity leave cannot be excluded while eligibility for declaration of probation is considered. This Government Order has been incorporated in the KSR as well. From the Government Order, it is obvious that the period of maternity leave ought to have been reckoned for the purpose of declaration of probation. This has not been done in this case.
I am clarified that the petitioner is entitled to a direction to the respondents to reckon the maternity leave period availed of by the Petitioner for 90 days from 24.10.1991 and to declare her probation on that basis. This the 3rd respondent shall do, within 4 weeks of production of a copy of the judgment.
On that basis, the pay and other emoluments, including the option exercised by the Petitioner for the benefit of pay revision shall be reconsidered in the light of the said order.
Petitioner shall produce a coy of the judgment before the 3rd respondent, who shall comply with the order.