Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Dr Arti vs Delhi Secretariat on 12 February, 2026
1
Item No. 53 O.A. No. 195/2025
Court No. IV
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench, New Delhi
O.A. No. 195/2025
Reserved on :- 29.01.2026
Pronounced on:- 12.02.2026
Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)
Hon'ble Mr. Rajinder Kashyap, Member (A)
DR. ARTI
(AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS)
D/O SHRI KALICHARAN
R/O RZF-544 GALl NO. 42
SADH NAGAR-II
PALAM COLONY
NEW DELH-110045
...Applicant
(By Advocate: Mr. Ramesh Kumar Pandey)
Versus
1. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY
DELHI SECRETARIAT
DELHI 11 0002
2. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
DEPTT. OF HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE
9TH LEVEL, A WING
DELHI SECRETARIAT DELHI 110002.
3. LT. GOVERNOR OF DELHI
THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
RAJ NISWAS, RAJPUR ROAD
DELHI 110054.
...Respondents
SHILPI GUPTA
SHILPI GUPTA 2026.02.12
16:57:37+01'00' (By Advocates: Ms. Purnima Maheshwari with
Mr. D K Singh)
2
Item No. 53 O.A. No. 195/2025
Court No. IV
ORDER
Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J) :
Highlighting the facts of the case, learned counsel for the applicant drew our attention to the record of proceedings dated 28.01.2026, which is reproduced below:
"The applicant seeks the following relief(s) through this Original Application (OA):
"It is most humbly prayed that the Hon'ble CAT may be pleased (1) to set aside the Memorandum No. F.No.1 (111) 2014/DHS/SWD/PF/6444 dated 6.12.24 which states inter alia that the period of absence from duty (29.06.2020 to 03.07.2023) will be treated as dies non for all purposes (II) Direct respondents to sanction study leave to the applicant with effect from 30th June 2020 to 29th June, 2023.
(III) Direct respondents to immediately rerelease the arrears of leave salary and admissible allowances of the applicant till 03.07.2023, (IV) Direct respondents to release the arrears of pay and allowances of the applicant w.e.f.04.07.2023 to 31.08.2024.
(V) May be pleased pass such other orders in the favor of the applicant as deemed fit."
2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a Medical Officer (GDMO cadre) under the Directorate of Health Services, Government of NCT of Delhi, having joined service on 03.09.2014. She successfully completed her probation and rendered more than five years of regular service, thereby becoming fully eligible for grant of Study Leave under Rule 50 of the CCS (Leave) Rules, 1972.
SHILPI GUPTA 2.1 It is submitted that the applicant, after obtaining prior SHILPI GUPTA 2026.02.12 16:57:37+01'00' permission and No Objection Certificate from the competent authority, appeared in NEET-PG 2020 and qualified the same with All India Rank 26957. Pursuant thereto, she was allotted MS (Ophthalmology) at Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Aligarh, under Aligarh Muslim University. In furtherance of the said selection, the applicant submitted a 3 Item No. 53 O.A. No. 195/2025 Court No. IV formal application dated 10.04.2020 seeking grant of Study Leave for a period of 36 months w.e.f. 30.06.2020 to 29.06.2023.
2.2 Learned counsel submits that prior to proceeding on leave, the applicant completed all codal formalities, including execution of the mandatory bond for three years' salary amounting to ₹52,24,781/- and an undertaking to rejoin service upon completion of the course. She also furnished the mandatory seat-leaving bond required by the University and submitted her departure report on 29.06.2020.
"NOW THE CONDITION OF THE ABOVE WRITTEN OBLIGATION IS THAT in the event of my failing to resume duty or resigning or retiring from service otherwise quitting service without returning to duty after the expiry or termination of the period of study leave or failing to complete the course of study or at any time within a period of three years/five years after my return to duty, I shall forth with pay to the Government or as may be directed by the Government, on demand the said sum of Rs. 52,24,781/- (Rupees Fifty Two Lakh Twenty four thousand seven hundred Eighty only) together with interest thereon from the date of demand at Government rates for the time being in force on Government loans."
**** "subject: - Departure report of Dr. Arti on 29 June 2020 (A/N) Respected Madam, I am Dr. Arti GDMO Batch 2014 working in DGHC Malikpur got prior permission to appear in NEET 2020 from worthy Pro Secretary and applied for study leave of 36 months w.e.f 30th June 2020 for joining MS OPHTHALMOLOGY at JAWAHARLAL NEHRU MEDICAL COLLEGE under ALIGHARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY, ALIGHARH.
As per guideline issued by MCC under DGHS, MOHFW GOVT OF INDIA i have mandatory physical joining at allotted college and department in a time bound manner which is before 30th June 2020 otherwise I will lose my candidature of PG seat with fortification of fees and hard work of many years will go in vain. It is a matter of my future and progression in career. I am SHILPI GUPTA proceeding on study leave from 30th June 2020 u are SHILPI GUPTA 2026.02.12 requested to kindly accept my departure report. This is 16:57:37+01'00' for your kind information and necessary action. I will be highly obliged to you.
Thanking you."
4 Item No. 53 O.A. No. 195/2025Court No. IV Thereafter, the applicant joined the PG course on 01.07.2020 under the bona fide belief that the Study Leave would be formally sanctioned, as is the settled practice.
2.3 It is further submitted that after the applicant had already joined the course, the respondents, vide communication dated 24.08.2020, informed her that the matter regarding sanction of Study Leave was kept pending. Subsequently, vide order dated 18.03.2021--nearly nine months after commencement of the course--the respondents conveyed that Study Leave was not sanctioned, purportedly due to a policy decision taken during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, no order recalling the applicant to duty was issued, nor were any consequential directions passed. The order dated 18.03.2021 reads as under:-
"Sub: Reg. Study Leave in R/o Dr. Arti, Medical Officer.
This is with reference to your request dt. 16.06.2020 for grant of study leave w.e.f. 30.06.2020 to 29.06.2023 (3 years) to pursue Post Graduation Course i.e. MS OPHTHALMOLOGY at JAWAHARLAL NEHRU MEDICAL COLLEGE, ALIGHARH. In this regard it is to inform you that as per directions received from Pr. Secretary ( H & FW), In light of the prevailing situatin of COVID-19 in Delhi and the projections made by Experts about the increase in cases during Nov. Dec. 2020, it would not be possible, in the public interest, to spare the services of DGMO's. The Deptt. recommends that proposals for grant of study leave may not be accede to at this juncture."
Accordingly the study leave of Dr. Arti is not granted. Further Dr. Arti has proceeded to pursue Post Graduation w.e.f. 30.06.2020 hence Dr. Arti is hereby directed to join her duties immediately."
2.4 Learned counsel submits that several doctors similarly circumstanced as the applicant, namely Dr. Dharmendra Kumar, Dr. Vipul Pandey, Dr. Brijesh Patel, Dr. Avneesh Tripathi, and Dr. Puneet Mishra, have been granted Study Leave to pursue Post-Graduate courses during July/August/September, 2021. In fact, in the case of Dr. Dharmendra Kumar, the order of the Hon'ble Lieutenant Governor was conveyed through the Additional Secretary to the LG. Further, in the case of Dr. Rohit Kumar, Study Leave was sanctioned even after the policy decision dated 20.10.2020, as upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dr. Rohit Kumar vs. Secretary, Office of the Lt. Governor, SHILPI GUPTA GNCTD, vide order dated 15.07.2021 passed in Civil Appeal SHILPI GUPTA 2026.02.12 No. 2739 of 2021.
16:57:37+01'00' It is therefore submitted that denial of Study Leave to the applicant would amount to grave injustice and stark discrimination, violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
5 Item No. 53 O.A. No. 195/2025Court No. IV 2.5 Learned counsel further submits that in the matter of Dr. Ruchita Ghaloria & Ors. vs. Medical Superintendent & Ors. (LPA No. 121/2021 with CM Appeal No. 112/2021 and connected cases), the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, vide judgment dated 29.09.2021, held as under:
"12. We accordingly, direct Respondent No. 3 to ensure that the concerned hospitals, i.e., Aruna Asaf Ali Hospital and Baba Saheb Ambedkar Hospital issue the requisite orders for grant of study leave to the Appellants along with the relieving/movement orders during the course of the day, without any further delay......."
2.6 Similarly, in Sunita vs. Government of NCT of Delhi, OA No. 336 of 2020, this Tribunal, vide order dated 10.11.2022, held as under:
"(9) "....... The present OA has got merit on itself particularly when the applicant's counsel has shown that there is a practice in the department, where they are doing ex-post-facto approval for grant of study leave after two years in due course, which takes time. In the present case, particularly in view of the clause (iii) mentioned herein above there is no reason for the rejection of the same because it is directly connected to the job performed by her. Her career and department would be benefitted out of her higher qualification. This further study will widen mind of the applicant for performing duties. Thus, present OA stands allowed with direction to the respondents to pay her salary, and grant the extra ordinary leave! study leave to- her by placing her file before Chief Secretary, Govt. of NCTD, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, who may take decision within a period of 45 days and same shall be communicated to the applicant...................."
2.7 Learned counsel submits that despite repeated representations made by the applicant seeking post facto sanction of Study Leave, the respondents failed to take a final decision for a prolonged period. Instead, the respondents issued an order dated 09.11.2021 inviting fresh applications for Study Leave from similarly placed Medical Officers, pursuant to which the applicant again submitted her request. During this period, the applicant continued her studies and completed a substantial portion of the course.
2.8 It is further submitted that while the applicant's request for Study Leave remained undecided, the SHILPI GUPTA respondents arbitrarily stopped her salary vide order dated SHILPI GUPTA 2026.02.12 11.10.2022 and subsequently directed her to refund an 16:57:37+01'00' amount of ₹35,89,345/- towards salary allegedly drawn during the study period. The said actions were taken without final adjudication of her entitlement to Study Leave and without affording her any effective opportunity of hearing.
6 Item No. 53 O.A. No. 195/2025Court No. IV 2.9 Learned counsel submits that the applicant successfully completed her postgraduate course and rejoined duties on 04.07.2023. Despite her resumption of duties and continued representations, the respondents, after a delay of more than 18 months, issued the impugned Memorandum dated 06.12.2024 directing that the period from 29.06.2020 to 03.07.2023 be treated as dies non and calling upon the applicant to apply for Extraordinary Leave, failing which adverse consequences were threatened.
2.10 It is submitted that the applicant's absence was neither unauthorized nor wilful, as she proceeded on Study Leave after due permission, completion of formalities, and in public interest. The impugned actions of the respondents are arbitrary, discriminatory, violative of CCS (Leave) Rules, 1972, and contrary to settled judicial precedents wherein similarly situated Medical Officers have been granted Study Leave even during the COVID period.
2.11 Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the proposed higher studies would enhance the applicant's professional knowledge and skills and, upon return, contribute to improved institutional functioning and service delivery.
2.12 Hence, aggrieved by the arbitrary denial of Study Leave, stoppage of salary, recovery orders, and the decision to treat the study period as dies non, the applicant has approached this Tribunal seeking appropriate reliefs.
3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the present Original Application is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed both on facts as well as in law. She reiterates the averments made in the counter affidavit.
3.1. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the decision relied upon by the applicant pertains to a period prior to the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic and, therefore, does not come to the rescue of the applicant. The factual matrix in the present case is entirely different and the said decision is clearly distinguishable. Hence, no parity can be claimed by the applicant.
3.2 Learned counsel for the respondents further submits that it was the applicant herself who intimated the respondents regarding her allotment to a postgraduate course. In this regard, she draws attention to the letter dated 13.05.2020, whereby the applicant informed the respondents about her allotment to M.S. (Ophthalmology) at SHILPI GUPTA Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Aligarh, Aligarh Muslim SHILPI GUPTA 2026.02.12 University, which reads as under:-
16:57:37+01'00' "Subject: -Intimation regarding participation Round - 2 of all India online counseling NEET PG 2020 Respected Madam, 7 Item No. 53 O.A. No. 195/2025 Court No. IV I Dr. Arti GDMO Batch 2014 working in DGHC Malikpur given prior information regarding allotment of MS OPHTHALMOLOGY at JAWAHARLAL NEHRU MEDICAL COLLEGE, ALlGARH under ALIGHARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY in round -1 of all India counseling conducted by MCC under DGHC,MOHFW GOVT OF INDIA.I wish to participate in round-2 of same counseling for upgradation of postgraduation course according to availability of PG seat higher in my preferences. I assure you that postgraduation course in medical specialty allotted to me in NEET PG 2020 Counseling round-2 will be in public interest to improve my skills to deliver better health care services to my patients. If there is no upgradation in my postgraduation course in round-2 I will be joining same course allotted to me in round-l.
You are requested to kindly permit me to participate in round-2 all India counselling NEET PG 2020 and sanction me 36 months of paid study leave for postgraduation course. This is for your kind information and necessary action. I will be highly obliged to you.
Thanking you."
3.3 It is further submitted that, despite being aware that no approval had been granted, the applicant, on her own volition and without awaiting a final decision, proceeded on leave. Learned counsel submits that the applicant acted unilaterally and proceeded with the course without obtaining prior sanction of study leave, which is mandatory under the applicable rules. Such conduct is contrary to service discipline and cannot be condoned.
3.4 Learned counsel further draws attention to the fact that the request for grant of study leave was kept pending pursuant to the communication dated 24.08.2020. The said communication clearly indicates that the competent authority had not accorded approval and the matter was still under examination. Despite this, the applicant chose to continue without authorization. The communication dated 24.08.2020 reads as under:-
"SUB: REG. STUDY LEAVE IN R/O DR. ARTI, MEDICAL OFFICER.
This is with reference to your request dt. 12.03.2020 for grant of study leave w.e.f. 30.06.2020 to 29.06.2023 (3 years) to pursue Post Graduation Course i.e. MS OPHTHALMOLOGY at Jawaharal Nehru Medical SHILPI GUPTA College, Aligarh. In this regard it is to inform you that SHILPI GUPTA 2026.02.12 the worthy Pro Secretary (H & FW) has directed to keep 16:57:37+01'00' the matter pending. The same is in pursuance of directions issued by Add!. Secretary to LG. Copy of directions issued by Add!. Secretary to LG is enclosed for ready reference.8 Item No. 53 O.A. No. 195/2025
Court No. IV This is for your information and necessary action."
3.5 Learned counsel for the respondents further places reliance upon the office order dated 27.09.2021 and also draws attention to the order dated 28.02.2020. She submits that these documents clearly demonstrate that the respondents followed due procedure and took decisions in accordance with the applicable rules, instructions, and administrative exigencies.
The order dated 27.09.2021 reads as under:-
"ORDER In supersession of this Department's Order No.F. 11/59/H&FW/2018/HR- M/PF/CD #23112513622/1051-58 dated 22/10/2020 vide which the requests for grant of study leave to GDMOs to pursue Post graduation courses was withheld; Hon'ble Lt. Governor is pleased to order :-
(1) Medical Officers who have earlier applied for grant of study leave but their may subject to availability to their seat in allotted Medical College/ Institution requests have apply for study leave as per Rule 50 of CCS Leave rules, 1972.
Further, the fresh request for grant of study leave may be submitted after completion of all codal formalities as per rule ibid.
This issues with approval of the Competent Authority.
The order dated 28.02.2020 reads as under:-
"ORDER It has come to notice that in several cases received in this Department, doctors have already proceeded on Study Leave/ EOL (for Study Purpose) without taking prior approval of the Competent Il has come to notice that in several cases received in this Department, doctors have already Authority i.e. Hon'ble Lt Governor, Delhi. Circular dated 23-10-2019 has been issued by this department to submit the matters related to grant of Study Leavel EOL for Study Purpose well in time i.e.
04 weeks prior to the event, failing which the proposal will not be considered in this department and the same SHILPI GUPTA will be concerned hospital authorities and proposals are SHILPI GUPTA 2026.02.12 being received late which lead to delay lapses on part 16:57:37+01'00' of returned to concerned Hospital Medical Institution The same is not being complied in true spirit by the concerned hospital authorities and proposals are being received lead to delay/lapses on part of administrative authorities for one or another reasons.
9 Item No. 53 O.A. No. 195/2025Court No. IV All MSS/ MDs/ Dean/ Directors of the Hospitals Medical Institutions under Health & Family Welfare Department Govt. of NCT of Delhi are hereby requested to ensure that such proposals on aforesaid subjects are the proposal will not considered in this branch and the same will be returned to concerned Hospilal Medical institution. The aforesaid proposals will be submitted to this department alongwith following documents. Incomplete proposals will not be accepted in any circumstances 1 Prior permission to appear for PG Examination. The Administrative Secretary (H&FW) iscompetent to grant permission to appear for PG Exams.
2 Vigilance Status Report (in prescribed format) at hospital medical institution level.
3 Bond in Form-6 (lor EOL for Study)/ Form-7 (for Study Leave) wherein the concerned officer has requested for grant of 03 years of EOL Study Leave for prosecuting higher studies 4 Undertaking to serve Health & Family Welfare Department, GNCTO wherein the concerned ollicer has requested for grant of 01 year/02 years of EOL Study Leave for prosecuting higher studies.
5 Velling of Accounts Functionary of concerned hospital/ medical institution in case of Study Leave.
6. Recommendations of MD/MS/Dean/ Director.
The MSs/ MDs/ Dean/ Directors of the concemed Hospitals/ Medical institutions under Health & Family Welfare Department, Govt of NCT of Delhi, would be held responsible for delay in submission of aforesaid proposals. In case, the concerned officer violate the rules and proceed on Study Leave/ EOL (for Study Purpose) without prior approval then MSs/ MDs/Dean/ Directors of the concerned Hospitals/ Medical institutions is hereby directed to take necessary action against the concerned officer as per rules. Further, no ex-post facto approval will be granted in any circumstances.
This issues with the prior approval of Pr. Secretary (H&FW)."
SHILPI GUPTA SHILPI GUPTA 2026.02.12 3.6 It is further submitted that the applicant was afforded 16:57:37+01'00' sufficient opportunities at every stage. The respondents examined her case objectively and in accordance with law. There has been no arbitrariness, malafide, or discrimination in dealing with the applicant's request. The respondents 10 Item No. 53 O.A. No. 195/2025 Court No. IV have acted uniformly and consistently, and no special treatment was extended or denied to the applicant.
2.7 Learned counsel further draws attention to the order dated 17.03.2021, which reads as under:-
"Sub: Reg. Study Leave in R/o Dr. Arti, Medical Officer.
This is with reference to your request dt. 16.06.2020 for grant of study leave w.e.f. 30.06.2020 to 29.06.2023 (3 years) to pursue Post Graduation Course i.e. MS OPHTHALMOLOGY at JAWAHARLAL NEHRU MEDICAL COLLEGE, ALIGHARH. In this regard it is to inform you that as per directions received from Pr. Secretary ( H & FW), In light of the prevailing situatin of COVID-19 in Delhi and the projections made by Experts about the increase in cases during Nov. Dec. 2020, it would not be possible, in the public interest, to spare the services of DGMO's. The Deptt. recommends that proposals for grant of study leave may not be accede to at this juncture."
Accordingly the study leave of Dr. Arti is not granted. Further Dr. Arti has proceeded to pursue Post Graduation w.e.f. 30.06.2020 hence Dr. Arti is hereby directed to join her duties immediately."
2.8 Learned counsel submits that even during the COVID- 19 pandemic, administrative functioning continued in accordance with rules, and the applicant cannot take advantage of the pandemic to justify her unauthorized absence. It is specifically submitted that the applicant failed to join duties despite being aware that study leave had not been granted. In the absence of sanctioned leave, the applicant had no legal right to continue the course or remain away from duty.
2.9 It is, therefore, submitted that the applicant has failed to establish any legal right or violation thereof. The decisions relied upon by the applicant do not apply to the facts of the present case. The respondents have strictly adhered to the prescribed procedure, and no prejudice has been caused to the applicant except what has arisen due to her own conduct.
2.10 Accordingly, learned counsel for the respondents prays that the Original Application be dismissed.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant is directed to verify SHILPI GUPTA the relevant dates and examine whether the case falls within SHILPI GUPTA 2026.02.12 the parameters of the decisions rendered in Dr. Rohit 16:57:37+01'00' Kumar (supra) Ruchita Giloria (supra).
4. Let the matter remain on board for further arguments."
11 Item No. 53 O.A. No. 195/2025Court No. IV
2. Opposing the grant of relief, learned counsel for the respondents relied upon the averments contained in the counter affidavit and submitted that the applicant, of her own volition, chose to avail Earned Leave and proceeded to join the postgraduate course without awaiting final sanction of Study Leave, particularly in the prevailing COVID-19 pandemic situation. It was contended that the applicant consciously took a decision to proceed on leave and join the course despite being aware that her request for Study Leave had neither been approved nor finally decided by the competent authority. Learned counsel for the respondents sought to distinguish the judgment in Dr. Rohit Kumar (supra) relied upon by learned counsel for the applicant, submitting that in the said case the applicant had not joined the course in question, and the relief was granted in a factually different scenario. In contrast, in the present case, the applicant had already joined the course and continued to pursue it without sanctioned Study Leave, which fundamentally alters the factual and legal position. It is further submitted that in Dr. Rohit Kumar (supra), the authorities had passed specific orders to accommodate the applicant at a SHILPI GUPTA SHILPI GUPTA 2026.02.12 16:57:37+01'00' subsequent stage, whereas no such circumstances exist in the present case. Accordingly, it is urged that the said 12 Item No. 53 O.A. No. 195/2025 Court No. IV decision is clearly distinguishable and does not advance the applicant's case.
2.1. Learned counsel for the respondents further distinguished the judgment in Dr. Ruchita Ghiloria (supra), submitting that in the said case the Hon'ble Lieutenant Governor had granted Study Leave post-
COVID-19, and the relief was accorded in a materially different factual backdrop. It was contended that the circumstances prevailing in the present case are distinct, and therefore, the said decision is not applicable to the applicant's case.
2.2. Learned counsel further submitted that the applicant had sufficient opportunity to approach this Tribunal at the appropriate stage. Having failed to do so, she cannot now, at a belated stage, seek to assail the orders passed against her or raise grievances after having acquiesced in the decisions taken by the respondents.
2.3. Learned counsel for the respondents has also drawn attention to a subsequent application dated 13.05.2020 SHILPI GUPTA (Annexure-R1), wherein the applicant sought permission SHILPI GUPTA 2026.02.12 16:57:37+01'00' to participate in Round-2 of the All India Online Counselling for NEET-PG 2020.
13 Item No. 53 O.A. No. 195/2025Court No. IV
3. In rejoinder, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the respondents have failed to rebut the core merits of the applicant's claim and have instead sought to non-suit her on technical and procedural objections. It was contended that the correspondence regarding sanction of Study Leave admittedly remained pending, thereby giving rise to a continuing cause of action, and the plea of limitation or lack of jurisdiction is wholly misconceived. Learned counsel further submitted that the applicant, having completed all codal formalities and to avoid forfeiture of her postgraduate seat, proceeded to join the course under a bona fide belief that Study Leave would be sanctioned, especially when similarly placed Medical Officers of the same cadre were granted such leave during the relevant period. The subsequent action of the respondents in treating the study period as dies non, stopping salary even after the applicant resumed duties on 04.07.2023, and withholding pay and allowances for more than 14 months is asserted to be arbitrary, discriminatory, and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution, as well as the CCS (Leave) Rules, 1972. It is further urged that SHILPI GUPTA SHILPI GUPTA 2026.02.12 16:57:37+01'00' the respondents' insistence on Extraordinary Leave, instead of Study Leave, demonstrates arbitrariness in 14 Item No. 53 O.A. No. 195/2025 Court No. IV altering the nature of admissible leave, contrary to settled principles, warranting grant of the reliefs sought.
3.1. Learned counsel for the applicant also gave a brief description of the cases of Dr. Rohit Kumar (supra) and Dr. Ruchita Ghiloria (supra) to demonstrate that Study Leave was granted to similarly situated doctors of the Government of NCT of Delhi even during the COVID-19 period and, significantly, after the policy decision of October 2020. It was submitted that in Dr. Rohit Kumar (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court directed admission to the postgraduate course commencing in July 2021 on the basis of INICET-2020, thereby effectively permitting Study Leave post-policy decision. Likewise, in Dr. Ruchita Ghiloria (supra), the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi directed grant of Study Leave along with relieving orders to enable joining of the PG course in September 2021. Learned counsel submitted that these decisions clearly establish that the policy decision of October 2020 was not an absolute bar and that denial of Study Leave to the applicant, despite parity in cadre and circumstances, is arbitrary and discriminatory.
SHILPI GUPTA SHILPI GUPTA 2026.02.12 4. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and 16:57:37+01'00' perused the pleadings available on record.
15 Item No. 53 O.A. No. 195/2025Court No. IV
5. ANALYSIS :
5.1. The basic question that arises for consideration is whether Study Leave can be granted as a matter of right or whether discretion vests with the competent authority to refuse the same in public interest. Learned counsel for the respondents vehemently contended that, during the COVID-19 period, an administrative decision was taken pursuant to directions issued by the Hon'ble Lieutenant Governor, whereby no Study Leave was to be sanctioned, and consequently, the applicant's request was kept on hold owing to the peculiar circumstances prevailing during the pandemic.
5.2. It is not in dispute that the applicant had obtained prior permission and a No Objection Certificate from the competent authority to appear in NEET-PG 2020, which she duly qualified with an All India Rank of 26957.
Pursuant thereto, she was allotted the MS (Ophthalmology) course at Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Aligarh, under Aligarh Muslim University. In furtherance of the said selection, the applicant submitted a formal application dated 10.04.2020 seeking grant of SHILPI GUPTA SHILPI GUPTA 2026.02.12 16:57:37+01'00' Study Leave for a period of 36 months, i.e., from 30.06.2020 to 29.06.2023.
16 Item No. 53 O.A. No. 195/2025Court No. IV 5.3. It is not in dispute that the grant and regulation of Study Leave, as well as other kinds of leave, are governed by the Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1972.
Undoubtedly, under Rule 50, an application for Study Leave is required to be considered on the merits of each individual case. Rule 51 provides that Study Leave may be granted for higher education or specialized training having a direct and close connection with the sphere of the applicant's official duties, subject to the maximum period prescribed therein. Rule 52 prescribes the procedure for making an application for Study Leave, while Rule 53 deals with the sanction thereof by the competent authority. In the present case, the applicant submitted an application dated 10.04.2020, which was received by the respondents on 15.04.2020, wherein the applicant stated as under:
"This is to state that, I Dr. Arti, had joined Delhi health services as Medical officer( GDMO cadre) on 03 September 2014.1 am presently posted at DGHC Malikpur got prior Permission and NO( to Appear in NEET PG 2020 (Order· no.-DGHS-42!203/2016-ESST- CDMO-SWD DIRGE/DGHS/4940) held on 5th January 2020 for pursuing post-graduation course. I qualified NEH PG 2020 securing All India Rank 26957. I already given Prior intimation to participate in online counseling starting from March 2020. As per result of online counselling round-1 Tentative date of starting SHILPI GUPTA SHILPI GUPTA 2026.02.12 my leave 18th April 2020 and tentative date of 16:57:37+01'00' completion of study leave is 31st May 2023.1 have been allotted MS OPTHALMOLOGY at JAWAHARLAL NEHRU MEDICAL COLLEGE, ALIGARH under ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY.17 Item No. 53 O.A. No. 195/2025
Court No. IV I request you to Sanction me 36 months of study leave as I wish to join post-graduation course in medical specialty allotted to me in NEET PG 2020 Counselling which is in public interest to improve my skills to deliver better healthcare services to my patients. I will abide by ail the service rules and I will join back Delhi health services and would continue to work for public welfare after completion of my medical post-graduation degree, in a better and improved way.
I had joined Delhi Health Services on 03-09-2014 and I have completed five years of regular service. My date of birth is 21-09-1987 and due date of retirement is 30- 09-2052. I will be drawing my salary from Department of health & family welfare govt. of NCT Delhi. You are requested to kindly sanction me 36 months of paid study leave for post-graduation course. This is for your kind information and necessary action. I will be highly obliged to you."
5.4. While considering the question of grant or refusal of Study Leave, the exigencies of public service are a factor of paramount importance. The unprecedented situation arising out of the COVID-19 pandemic, which placed enormous strain on healthcare services, cannot be disputed or ignored.
5.5. It is also not in dispute that the policy decision taken by the Hon'ble Lieutenant Governor to withhold the sanction of Study Leave during the period of acute shortage of doctors was made in the larger public interest. The applicant has not challenged the validity of this policy decision, which was clearly aimed at ensuring SHILPI GUPTA SHILPI GUPTA 2026.02.12 16:57:37+01'00' the continuity of essential medical services during the pandemic.
18 Item No. 53 O.A. No. 195/2025Court No. IV 5.6 In State of Punjab and Ors. vs. Dr. Rajeev Sarwal decided on 08.04.1999 [(1999) 9 SCC 240, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under:
"3. We do not think the approach of the High Court in this matter is justified. The proper course was to interpret the rule and apply the same."
...
5. Ordinarily study leave can be availed for a period of twelve months but may be extended upto 24 months during the entire service. The rule is categorical and does not consist of any doubt regarding this purpose. The maximum period of study leave cannot exceed 24 months even in case where study leave is granted under other rules.
6. The contention put forth on behalf of the respondent that the period of study leave could be granted at a time not exceeding 24 months does not stand to reason at all because the rule is very clear that 24 months is relatable to the entire service and not to any part of service. The validity of the rule was not challenged before the High Court. Therefore, that aspect could not be gone into by the High Court. Nor could it be said that the exercise of power by the appellant was arbitrary, in any manner, merely because that power of relaxation was used in certain cases. In our opinion relaxation also cannot be read into a provision of this nature where the rule itself mandates the maximum period to be 24 months for the entire service. The order made by the High Court is, therefore, not sustainable."
5.7 If, in the opinion of the government, there is a severe shortage of doctors due to the Covid -19 pandemic during the relevant period, which is immediately after joining the service, a doctor cannot be granted study leave. In our opinion, such a policy cannot be stated to be unreasonable or ultra vires to the government's powers under the Rules. As long as this policy is framed SHILPI GUPTA SHILPI GUPTA 2026.02.12 16:57:37+01'00' after conscious consideration, taking into account all relevant aspects of the matter, as long as this policy is otherwise reasonable, and as long as this policy is 19 Item No. 53 O.A. No. 195/2025 Court No. IV applied uniformly without instances of pick and choose, this Tribunal would not mandate the government administration to compulsorily grant leave to doctors to pursue higher studies. The mere fact that a No Objection Certificate (NOC) was granted for applying for higher studies does not ipso facto lead to the conclusion that such NOC was irrevocable, especially as the COVID-19 situation was unforeseen at the relevant time.
5.8 In State of Rajasthan & Ors. v. Dr. Sheikh Mohammad Afzal & Ors. (High Court of Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench) D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 428/2022 | 20-10-2023, the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan held as follows:
"14. Therefore, considering the fact that the grant of 'study leaves' is governed by the Rules of 1951 wherein discretion has been reserved with the sanctioning authority to satisfy itself of the best interests of the public as well as the department and/or service in which the government servant is rendering his services in; that a government servant cannot claim 'study leave' as a matter of right; that the exception to Rule 112 providing 36 months of 'study leave' is read in conjunction with Rule 112(1)(i), thereby implying that the grant of 36 months of 'study leave' is contingent upon the fulfilment of Rule 112(1)(i), which provides for the sanctioning authority to satisfy itself that the grant of study leave will be in the best interest of the working of the department or the service to which the applicant-employee belongs; that the circular dated 17.09.2020 leaves no ambiguity regarding the government servant who wants to pursue a PG Course in a different branch/stream/speciality and relying upon the dictum of the Division Bench of this SHILPI GUPTA Court as rendered in Kamaldeep Khatri (Supra), this Court SHILPI GUPTA 2026.02.12 is inclined to allow the present appeal.
16:57:37+01'00'
15. As a result, the instant appeal is allowed. Consequentially, the order impugned dated 23.02.2021 is quashed and set aside."20 Item No. 53 O.A. No. 195/2025
Court No. IV 5.9. Much reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for the applicant on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dr. Rohit Kumar (supra), wherein it was observed as under:
"39. Having regard to the circumstances in which the Appellant has been declined Study Leave, it cannot also be said that the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have acted beyond the parameters of law. Nevertheless, the Appellant has suffered injustice, because of the denial of Study Leave, in that he has been deprived of the opportunity to pursue higher studies, which many other doctors have availed. It would be unfair to deny the Appellant the opportunity to enjoy the fruits of his efforts even now, when the COVID-19 situation has improved and is in control, only because the Respondents have not committed "apparent breach of rules and regulations" in refusing the Appellant Study Leave. This Court cannot fold its arms and remain a mute spectator to the plight of the Appellant. After all, "nothing rankles the heart more than a brooding sense of injustice .....
44. These directions are being passed in exercise of the power of this Court under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, in the facts and circumstances of this case, having regard to the fact that the Appellant had cleared INICET 2020 held in November 2020 and had been offered admission to PGI, Chandigarh, but could not join as he was not released on Study Leave in view of the serious COVID-19 situation prevailing in NCT of Delhi at the material time, and this order will not be treated as a precedent."
5.10. The decision rendered in Dr. Rohit Kumar (supra) was expressly held not to be treated as a precedent;
accordingly, it cannot be applied to the facts of the present case.
SHILPI GUPTA SHILPI GUPTA 2026.02.12 16:57:37+01'00' 5.11. In the present case, there is a clear breach of rules and regulations on the part of the applicant, as she, 21 Item No. 53 O.A. No. 195/2025 Court No. IV without awaiting an official order regarding the grant or refusal of leave, unilaterally chose to proceed on earned leave.
5.12. The personal convenience cannot outweigh the exigencies of public service; they are thus of paramount consideration. The Rules recognize the right to apply;
however, before such an application is accepted, the administration has the right, power, and duty to assess relevant factors of interest and the exigencies of public service. It cannot be the case that the applicant was unaware of the restrictions being imposed during COVID-19, the plea set by the applicant is an afterthought seeking post facto approval for rejoining after the completion of the higher studies course. The applicant has been paid a salary during the relevant period; this does not ipso facto tilt the balance of convenience in her favor. Rather, the respondents have been lenient in their approach toward the applicant.
Even the principle of estoppel cannot override the doctrine of legitimate expectation.
5.13 Needless to mention, the study leave may be SHILPI GUPTA SHILPI GUPTA 2026.02.12 16:57:37+01'00' combined with other kinds of leave, but in no case shall the grant of this leave in combination with leave other than extraordinary leave involve a total absence of more 22 Item No. 53 O.A. No. 195/2025 Court No. IV than twenty-eight months generally and thirty-six months for the courses leading to Ph.D. degree from the regular duties. (Ref: Rule 54(2) and (3), Leave Rules of 1972).
6. CONCLUSION :
6.1. In view of the foregoing analysis, we do not find any infirmity in the action of the respondents directing the applicant to treat the period as adjusted towards extraordinary leave or any other leave permissible under the Rules, and thereafter issuing a show-cause notice to pass order(s) for dies non. The present original application is devoid of merits and is, therefore, dismissed.
6.2. Pending M.A.(s), if any, shall also stand dismissed.
No costs.
(Rajinder Kashyap) (Manish Garg)
Member (A) Member (J)
/SG/AS/
SHILPI GUPTA
SHILPI GUPTA 2026.02.12
16:57:37+01'00'