JUDGMENT - N.J. PANDYA, J.:---The petitioner, an employee of the respondent/Bank remained absent from 12-9-1981 and that resulted into Departmental proceedings. Period of his absence was from 12-9-1981 to 10-7-1985. Departmental proceedings ended against him and he carried the matter in appeal. There the petitioner succeeded and he came to be reinstated. Thus the entire period of 12-9-1981 till 10-7-1985 had to be considered for the purpose of wages, allowances, increments, etc. if admissible on one hand and the continuity of service on the other. 2.He was granted continuity of service only and therefore one of the prayers in the present petition is that he should be granted both the wages and increments. 3.The matter does not stop here. On and from 11-7-85 the petitioner having been reinstated, he should have joined service. However, he was required to produce certificate of fitness from a Government Doctor and for this purpose the Bank had referred him to the Medical Board through the Dean, Medical College, Goa. As the petitioner was suffering from mental illness, the Board felt that his case could not be reviewed by the Board and the petitioner should therefore be referred to the Head of Department of the concerned branch of medicine. The matter continued in this manner right upto 3rd June, 1987, by which time eventually the Institute of Psychiatry and Human Behaviour was approached and on the strength of the certificate granted by that Institute, the petitioner eventually joined his duties on and from 3-6-1987. 4.For the latter period, his request is again two fold, namely, that he should be given wages as also the increments for the entire period. 5.So far as the wages are concerned, obviously he will not be getting for either of these two periods as he has not worked. The period of absence has been regularised by granting him Extraordinary Leave under Relation 37 of the Central Bank of India (Officers') Service Regulations 1979. "3. Pay and allowances are not admissible during the period of extraordinary leave and the period spent on such leave would not count for increments." 6.The aforesaid Guidelines clearly indicate that neither pay nor allowances will be admissible during the period of Extraordinary leave and that period is not to be counted for the purpose of increment as well. "3. Pay and allowances are not admissible during the period of extraordinary leave and the period spent on such leave would not count for increments." 6.The aforesaid Guidelines clearly indicate that neither pay nor allowances will be admissible during the period of Extraordinary leave and that period is not to be counted for the purpose of increment as well. 7.The prayer for granting the aforesaid benefits for the period from 12-9-1981 to 10-7-1985 therefore has to be rejected and is rejected. 8.Now remains the question of the period of 11-7-1985 to 2-6-1987. The explanation of the Bank is that under its Regulations, it was insisting and rightly so for production of fitness certificate. The Bank had issued necessary letters for the purpose, addressed to the Dean, Medical College, Goa, as per correspondence (pages 61 and 62). When the petitioner in fact approached the Board which was to hold its meeting on 25-7-85 as per Exhibit P-17 (page 66) the ultimate result was Nil. The Board communicated to the petitioner through the Assistant Dean as per Exhibit P-18 (page 67) on 17th July, 1985 that the case of the petitioner does not come under the purview of the Medical Board and the petitioner may be directed to the concerned Head of Department after ascertaining the nature of his illness. 9.The said letter was therefore clear that in order to get a fitness certificate, first the nature of his illness will have to be ascertained and thereafter the Head of Department of that particular branch dealing with the illness that the petitioner was found suffering from can consider the case of granting him fitness certificate. 10.It was known to the petitioner as well as to the Bank that his case was of mental illness. He therefore had to be referred to the Department of Psychiatry if there was one in the Goa Medical College or to the Institute of Psychiatry and Human Behaviour at Panaji. This was eventually done only in the year 1987. Till then correspondence kept on flying between the petitioner, Respondent/Bank and the Medical College with no results. He therefore had to be referred to the Department of Psychiatry if there was one in the Goa Medical College or to the Institute of Psychiatry and Human Behaviour at Panaji. This was eventually done only in the year 1987. Till then correspondence kept on flying between the petitioner, Respondent/Bank and the Medical College with no results. 11.From this correspondence (pages 69, 70 and 71) it is quite clear that the Bank was informed and so was the Medical College, Goa that the petitioner's case will have to be dealt with by the Department of Psychiarty and the Bank kept on insisting as per page 72 on 5th September, 1985 that the petitioner will have to be examined by the Medical Board. 12.The petitioner's case is that from the month of September, 1985 he should have been referred by the Dean, Goa Medical College or by the respondent/Bank to the Department of Psychiatry, Goa Medical College or to the said Institute and depending upon the fitness or otherwise declared by the concerned Doctors, the Bank could have taken a decision as to whether the petitioner may be allowed to join his duties or not. 13.We therefore, feel that not for the entire period of 11-7-85 to 2-6-87, but at least from 1-9-85 to 31st May, 1987 the request of the petitioner is required to be considered. He should be granted increments notionally and during the course of arguments, it was ascertained as to what is the method followed by the Bank for release of increments. The learned Advocate Shri Sonak, appearing for the respondent/Bank, on obtaining instructions from the Bank official who is present in Court, has informed us that the increment falling on a given day of the month in any year will be counted and released on and from the first day of that month. In this case the petitioner has resumed his duties on and from 3rd June, 1987 and the next year his increment will become due from 1-6-1987 and so on. Applying that method in the instant case for the aforesaid period his notional increment will have to be counted for the said period 1st September, 1985 to 31st May, 1987 for the subsequent years he, having resumed his duties and the increment that may have been released to him. Applying that method in the instant case for the aforesaid period his notional increment will have to be counted for the said period 1st September, 1985 to 31st May, 1987 for the subsequent years he, having resumed his duties and the increment that may have been released to him. However, pursuant to this order, corresponding effect will have to be given for the said period from 3-6-1987 onwards and working out increment on that basis, whatever financial benefits that are accruing to the petitioner shall also be given by the respondent/Bank to him. 14.So far as the prayer for wages for the period of 11-7-85 to 2-6-87 is concerned, we are not inclined to grant it as admittedly he has not worked for the same. 15.The petition is therefore allowed only for the aforesaid purpose of grant of increment. 16.The Bank shall work out the arrears on the basis of this order and pay the same within a period of three months from today. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent only. Under the circumstances, the parties are left to bear their own costs. Petition allowed partly. *****