JUDGMENT : 1. Heard. 2. Present petition has been preferred for quashing of the impugned order dated 30.01.2024 passed by the respondent no. 2-Director Ayurvedic Services, U.P., Lucknow whereby the application for grant of study leave for a period of 12 months for pursuing P.G. Course has been rejected and with a further prayer to direct the respondents to grant the petitioner study leave of 12 months in accordance with the provisions laid down in Chapter XI A of the Financial Hand Book. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner was selected and appointed vide appointment letter dated 01.09.2023 on the post of Medical Officer, Community Health Center (Ayurvedic and Unani), Ayush Department, Govt of U.P.. 4. It is further submitted that at the time of appointment of the petitioner, she was in the midst of her P.G. Course and to complete the same, she had moved an application for grant of study leave as provided under Part III of Financial Hand Book Volume II Part II to III. 5. The said application of the petitioner has been rejected by the respondent no. 2 by placing reliance on Rule 146 A (2) on the ground that the petitioner has less than five years of service and as the petitioner is on probation for a period of two years from the date of her joining. 6. It is further contended that the application of the petitioner has been rejected by the respondent no. 2 by wrongly placing reliance on the provision which is not applicable as far as it is related to the grant of extra leave. The case of the petitioner is covered under Rule 146 A (3) which deals with study leave and the said provision does not provide any such restriction that a Government Servant of less than five years of services is not entitled for the study leave. 7. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel has submitted that the petitioner since the date of appointment/joining is on two years probation period during which the leave cannot be granted and there is no illegality in the impugned order passed by the respondent no. 2. 8. 7. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel has submitted that the petitioner since the date of appointment/joining is on two years probation period during which the leave cannot be granted and there is no illegality in the impugned order passed by the respondent no. 2. 8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record of the case, the position which emerges out in the present case is that under Part III, Chapter XI A comes and these are ancillary Rules made by the Governor while exercising its power under Rule 84 of the U.P. Fundamental Rules. For convenience Rule 84 is quoted hereinbelow:- "84. Leave may be granted to Government servants, on such terms as the Governor may by rule or order prescribe, to enable them to study scientific, technical or similar problems or to undergo special courses of instructions. Such leave is not debited against the leave account." 9. Chapter XI A of Part III of the Financial Hand Book deals with study leave. The Rule 146 A (2) provides that study leave should not be ordinarily granted to a Government Servant of less than five years of service. For convenience, the same is quoted hereinbelow:- “146 A (2):- Extra leave on half average pay for the purpose of study leave may be taken either in or outside India. It may be granted to Government Servant of any of the department named above by the Government Servant, provided that when a Government Servant borne permanently of the cadre of one department is serving temporarily in another department the grant of leave is subject to the condition (a) that local arrangements can be made to carry on his work in his absence, and (b) that the recommendation of the department to which he is permanently attached is obtained before leave is given. Study leave should not ordinarily be granted to Government Servant of less than five years' service or to Government Servants within three years of the date at which they have the option of retiring." 10. Rule 146 A (3) provides the period of leave which could be granted and for convenience, the same is quoted hereinbelow:- “146 A (3):- Study leave shall be granted with due regard to the exigencies of the public service. Rule 146 A (3) provides the period of leave which could be granted and for convenience, the same is quoted hereinbelow:- “146 A (3):- Study leave shall be granted with due regard to the exigencies of the public service. In no case the grant of this leave, in combination with leave other than extraordinary leave or leave on medical certificate, shall involve an absence of over 28 months from a Government Servant's regular duties, or exceed two years in the whole period of a Government Servant service; nor shall it be granted with such frequency as to remove him from contact with his regular work or to cause cadre difficulties owing to his absence on leave. A period of twelve months at one time will ordinarily be regarded as a suitable maximum, and shall not be exceeded save for exceptional reasons." 11. Reading of Rule 146 A (2) which is general provision of the Financial Hand Book is applicable upon all the Government Servant who applies for the study leave whereas Rule 146 A (3) provides for not granting any study leave by combining with any other leave. It determines the maximum period for grant of study leave. Rule 146 A (3) is restrictive in nature which puts restriction for maximum period of study leave. 12. If the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is accepted that for study leave there is no condition that it would not be granted before 5 years of service, if that is to be accepted then it would lead to absurd result. The whole Chapter XI A deals with study leave and it is to be read conjointly and not separately. 13. In case, the Government Servant having less than 5 years of service has been granted the study leave, suppose for a period of 12 months and the duration of the course has been extended by 6 months or one year or more, in that case if the application for extra leave is moved by a Government Servant then the competent authority cannot reject the same on the ground that the Government Servant has not completed five years of service so the extra leave could not be granted. The period of service is to be seen initially at the time of grant of study leave not at the time of granting extra leave beyond 12 months which could normally be given as per Rule 146 A (3). 14. There is no force in the submission that condition of completion of 5 years of service before grant of leave applies only for grant of extra study leave and not in a case where leave is initially applied for. The whole reading of the provision under Chapter XI-A clearly leads to the conclusion that restriction of 5 years completed service would be applicable to the initial study leave as well. Otherwise, it would mean that if initial leave granted and requires extension for any reason then there has to be a gap of certain period before completing of 5 years service for extra leave. This would not be intention of the provision nor it seems to be practicable. The restriction of 5 years completion of service would more relevant for a fresher as in the present case who has joined the service a few months back and is still on probation. It cannot be said that for grant of initial study leave condition of completion of 5 years of service would not apply but it will applicable for extra study leave. This argument does not appeal to reason. The whole Chapter XI-A has to be read harmoniously to achieve the purpose of the provisions. 15. In view of the facts, circumstances and discussion made hereinabove and as the petitioner has completed only six months of services that too on probation her application has rightly been rejected by the respondent no. 2 by placing reliance on Rule 146 A (2) of the Chapter XI A of the Financial Hand Book Volume 2 Part 3. 16. Writ petition is devoid of merit, hence dismissed.