Sanwaria Girdhari vs Haryana State Electricity Board, Panchkula and others

M.M. Kumar, J.—The claim of the appellant-petitioner for grant of salary for a period of two years for study leave has been rejected by the learned Single Judge and feeling aggrieved the appellant has filed the instant appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent. A perusal of the impugned judgement dated 29.11.2011 would show that when the appellant applied for study leave, he filed an affidavit deposing that all the expenses would be borne by him and he undertook to serve the Board for a period of two years after acquiring higher qualification. He also made a statement that he would not claim any benefit except those given by the Board from time to time as a result of higher qualification. There was no policy of the Board at the time when the appellant applied for study leave to grant salary. However, later on respondents formulated a policy for grant of paid study leave which provided that a candidate seeking admission in degree course should have at least 5 years service in the Board. The appellant had filed CWP No. 12431 of 1989 which was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to pass a speaking order. In the order dated 12.1.1990 passed by the respondents it has been observed that the appellant did not fulfill the essential qualification of having regular five years service and accordingly benefit of study leave could not be granted to him whereas other person who has been granted the benefit had five years service to his credit.

We have heard learned counsel for the appellant at some length and are of the view that there is no rule or regulation or principle in common law that in lieu of the study leave, the appellant is to be paid salary. In the absence of any policy or regulation, no benefit could be granted to the appellant. The view taken by the learned Single Judge does not suffer from any legal infirmity warranting admission of the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.