Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 715 (HP)

Pankaj Chandel v. State of H. P.

2025-04-09

G.S. SANDHAWALIA, RANJAN SHARMA

body2025
JUDGMENT : G.S. Sandhawalia, C.J. The present Letters Patent Appeal seeks consideration of order dated 07.01.2025, passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby Civil Writ Petition No. 15236 of 2024 was dismissed, the prayer of the writ petitioner-appellant herein for grant of study leave was rejected and the order dated 09.12.2024 (Annexure P-15) passed by the Special Secretary (Health) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh was upheld. 2. The learned Single Judge was of the considered opinion that the claim as such for a period of three years for undertaking super specialty course, i.e. fellowship programme in Abdominal Organ Transplantation from IKDRC-ITS Ahmedabad, Gujarat, would be governed by the Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1972 (for short ‘the CCS Rules’) but there was no reference made to the relevant provisions of the Rules as such. In these circumstances, the learned Single Judge came to the conclusion that there was no such provision which mandates the respondents to grant study leave in favour of the petitioner and notification dated 07.08.2024 (Annexure P-16) relied upon by the petitioner, concerned the emoluments payable to an employee, who had been granted study leave. 3. Reliance placed upon Clause 11.1.2 of the PG/Super Specialty Policy dated 27.02.2019 by the petitioner before the learned Single Judge, did not find favour and the learned Single Judge came to the conclusion that the grant of study leave was the prerogative and concession of the employer. 4. Learned Single Judge further held that on earlier occasion in judgment dated 20.12.2007, passed by this Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 1968 of 2007 State of Himachal Pradesh Versus Dr. Sanjay Vikrant , it was held that on the ground of shortage of doctors, the State Government as such was entitled to deny the benefit and relief as such could not have been prayed for, as a matter of right. 5. Learned Single Judge also placed reliance upon judgment dated 22.08.2024, passed by the Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 15486 of 2018, Vikas Chaudhary Versus Pt. B.D. Sharma University of Health Sciences (UHS), Rohtak and others, wherein it was held that the concession of paid study leave was not a vested right of an employee. 6. B.D. Sharma University of Health Sciences (UHS), Rohtak and others, wherein it was held that the concession of paid study leave was not a vested right of an employee. 6. The learned Single Judge, on the issue of discrimination, came to the conclusion that the names of three persons which had been quoted in the rejoinder were not allowed to join super specialty courses, as per the statement made by the State Counsel. Resultantly, the decision of the respondents in rejecting the petitioner’s prayer for grant of study leave on account of shortage of doctors was upheld. 7. At the initial stage, when this appeal came up for hearing, we had noticed on 10.01.2025 that the impugned order dated 09.12.2024 (Annexure P-15) had never mentioned the reason as such for rejection, therefore, the right of the writ petitioner/appellant could not be curtailed by the State on the alleged reason for shortage of doctors as the improvement cannot be made in the written statement without the reason being present. The said order reads as under:- “No. HFW-A-E015/51/2023-HEALTH-A Government of Himachal Pradesh Department of Health & Family Welfare From The Secretary (Health) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh To The Director of Health Services, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla-09 Dated: Shimla-2 the 09.12.2024. Subject: Regarding application for study leave to pursue the fellowship in the abdominal Organ Transplantation IKDRC-ITS Ahamedabad, Gujarat in r/o Dr. Pankaj Chandel. Sir, I directed to refer to your office's letter No. HFW-H(I)B (3)94/24-4328 dated 03.12.2024 on the subject cited above and to say that after due consideration, the request of the said doctor has been rejected. You are, therefore, requested to take further necessary action in the matter accordingly. Yours faithfully. Signed by Suneel Sharma Dated 9/12/24 13:08:22 Dated 09/12/2024 Add. DHS Pvt. Secy/PA (Suneel Sharma) Special Secretary (Health) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh.” 8. We also gave opportunity to the State whether any three juniors as such had been permitted to avail the benefit of higher studies. Yours faithfully. Signed by Suneel Sharma Dated 9/12/24 13:08:22 Dated 09/12/2024 Add. DHS Pvt. Secy/PA (Suneel Sharma) Special Secretary (Health) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh.” 8. We also gave opportunity to the State whether any three juniors as such had been permitted to avail the benefit of higher studies. Vide a detailed order dated 20.03.2025, we noticed the ambit of Rule 50 of the CCS Rules keeping in view the affidavit filed by the Director, Health Services, Himachal Pradesh and a conclusion was arrived at that fresh order was required to be passed.Order dated 20.03.2025 reads as under: “The necessary affidavit has been filed by the Director Health Services, Himachal Pradesh, in pursuance to the order dated 10.03.2025 passed by this Court. The factum as such of three Doctors having been sponsored under the PG/Super Specialty Courses at PGIMER, Chandigarh and AIIMS, Rishikesh has come-forth, in terms of the Policy dated 27.02.2019, issued by the State of Himachal Pradesh. As per the Policy dated 27.02.2019, the State has sought to distinguish the sponsorship of the said candidates qua the present appellant by giving the full benefits of the study leave and would come in the ambit of Rule 50 of the Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1972. We have also gone through the said Rules, which provide that the study leave may be granted to the Government servant with due regard to the exigencies of public service and also that may not be granted, until a certificate is given by the authority to the proposed course of study or training or the study shall be of definite advantage from the point of view of public interest. A perusal of the impugned order dated 09.12.2024 (Annexure P-15), annexed to the writ petition passed by the Special Secretary (Health) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, would go on to show that the said order is non-speaking and only mentions that after due consideration, the request of the Doctors has been rejected. Due to lack of reasons as such, recorded in the the said order it can thus be placed in the category of a non-speaking order regarding which the law stands settled. Due to lack of reasons as such, recorded in the the said order it can thus be placed in the category of a non-speaking order regarding which the law stands settled. The State in its reply filed to the writ petition, has taken a plea that the State Health Department is facing acute shortage of Doctors/Specialists, which is an attempt as such but to improve its stand and justify the impugned order, which is not permissible in view of the law laid down in Mohinder Singh Gill & Another Vs. The Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi, 1978 (1) SCC 405 and (2014) 3 SCC 502 Dipak Babaria & Another Vs. State of Gujarat & Others . In such circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the fresh order is required to be passed and keeping in view the provisions of the relevant Rules, which the competent authority shall do the needful within one week from today. The said order shall also make a mention and give details regarding how many applications are pending for grant of study leave and how many were rejected and how many were allowed over the last three years. List on27.03.2025” 9. The State has passed a fresh order on 26.03.2025 and placed the same on record as Annexure R-1, which reads as under:- “ORDER Whereas, Dr. Pankaj Chandel, Senior Resident, Deptt. of Pediatric Surgery, AIMSS Chamiyana, Distt. Shimla had requested to grant study leave to pursue 3 years fellowship in the Abdominal Organ Transplantation from IKDRC-ITS, Ahmedabad, Gujarat on dated 08.11.2024 through the Director, Health Services, Shimla. AND WHEREAS, after due consideration, the case has been rejected vide this office letter of even No. dated 09.12.2024. AND WHEREAS, feeling aggrieved of rejection of his request, Dr. Pankaj Chandel has filed CWP No. 15236/2024 before the Hon’ble High Court and the HHC on dated 07.01.2025 has rejected the plea of the doctor. AND WHEREAS, Dr. Pankaj Chandel has filled LPA in the HHC and the Court passed the following orders in LPA No. 33/2025 on dated 20.03.2025 “the Court after much persuasion has granted one more opportunity to the State to pass a fresh order in present matter bearing in mind the fact that a reasons be which led to the rejection of study leave. The order so passed should have the details so mentions in the order so been passed by the concerned authority. The order so passed should have the details so mentions in the order so been passed by the concerned authority. AND WHEREAS, the undersigned in compliance to the orders of the Hon’ble High Court dated 20.03.2025, has gone through all the facts & circumstances and found that there is no policy to grant study leave/EOL to Medical Officers for pursuing three years fellowship programmes that to in a private institute situated at Ahmedabad, Gujarat. NOW THEREFORE, the undersigned after taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case, decided to reject the request of petitioner i.e. Dr. Pankaj Chandel, as the State Govt. does not send its doctors on long terms fellowship programs due to acute shortage of the specialists in the State and in the absence of long term fellowship policy.” 10. From the perusal of the aforesaid order, it transpires that the aforesaid order passed by the respondents in compliance to order dated 20 th March, 2025 is not a speaking order as directed to be passed keeping in view the provisions of the Rules, rather reference has been made to a policy. It is a trite law that policy is an executive instruction only to supplement the rules and cannot over-ride them. 11. Perusal of the same would further go to show that the reliance or denial as such is again on the ground that there was no policy to grant study leave/extraordinary leave to Medical Officers for pursuing three years’ fellowship programmes, that too in a private institute, situated at Ahmedabad, Gujarat. The other ground on which the petitioner's request was rejected was that the State Government did not send its doctors on long terms fellowship programs due to acute shortage of specialists in the State and in the absence of long term fellowship policy. 12. It has also come on record that one Dr. Praveen Kumar, Medical Officer (Eye), Civil Hospital, Haroli, Disrict Una was granted benefit of study leave on 19.10.2023, which has also been brought on record by the State itself, apparently in view of the directions passed by this Court in the order dated 20.03.2025 and it has been sought to justify that the doctor has left the course midway due to his ill health. The fact, however, remains that the State as such has granted the said benefit of study leave to an employee of the Health Department. The fact, however, remains that the State as such has granted the said benefit of study leave to an employee of the Health Department. There is no reference as such in the affidavit as to how many cases were rejected over the last three years. 13. The purpose of the Rule apparently has been lost sight by the Authorities and rather has not been adhered to while dealing with this case on two occasions. The exigency of the situation thus do not permit us to grant the respondents another opportunity to pass again a fresh order, as apparently in the present case, the petitioner had applied for grant of study leave way back on 12.10.2024 (Annexure P-8) for pursuing the course in question, had got admission on 07.11.2024 (Annexure P-11) and resultantly had applied for the necessary NOC on 08.11.2024 (Annexure P-12). Thereafter, he also applied for extension of time in joining period for the fellowship course on 23.11.2024 (Annexure P-14) with the Institute in Gujrat, since the matter was pending before the Authorities. 14. The Principal, Atal Institute of Medical Super Specialties, Chaminana, Shimla on 02.12.2024 (Annexure P-13) had forwarded the case of the petitioner to the Director Health Services, Himachal Pradesh, Kasumpti, Shimla, realizing the benefits of the super specialty course as such and had specifically mentioned that the writ petitioner had not availed study/extraordinary leave till now and the fellowship in the abdominal Organ Transplantation IKDRC-ITS would be beneficial to the State in the larger public interest. The said communication reads as under: “No: HFW-AIMSS-(B)3-314/2023-4522 ATAL INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SUPER SPECIALITIES SHIMLA-06 HIMACHAL PRADESH To The Director Health Services Himachal Pradesh, Kasumpti Shimla- 171009 Dated: Shimla-06, the 02 DEC 2024. Subject:- Regarding application for study leave to pursue the fellowship in the abdominal Organ Transplantation IKDRC-ITS Ahamedabad, Gujrat in r/o Dr. Pankaj Chandel. Sir, I have the honour to invite a reference to your office endorsement No. HFW-H(I)B(3)94/24-35097 dated 29.11.2024 on the subject cited above. In this regard it is submitted that as per service record of Dr. Pankaj Chandel, Sr. Resident Department of Peadiatric Surgery has not availed Study Leave/EOL till now. The Integrity Certificate/VCC in respect of doctor concerned is also enclosed as per record for your kin perusal please. In this regard it is submitted that as per service record of Dr. Pankaj Chandel, Sr. Resident Department of Peadiatric Surgery has not availed Study Leave/EOL till now. The Integrity Certificate/VCC in respect of doctor concerned is also enclosed as per record for your kin perusal please. It is also recommended that the above mention fellowship in the abdominal Organ Transplantation IKDRC-ITS will be beneficial to the State in the larger public interest. The Original application alongwith Service Certificate has already been sent to your good office vide this office letter of even no.4176-4179 on dated 14.11.2024. This is for your kind information and necessary action please” 15. The perusal of the paper book would go on to show that the matter was to be put up by the Director, Health Services, Department of Health and Family Welfare to the Principal, Health Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh and the matter was to be discussed with the Chief Minister for the grant of said benefits. Thereafter, impugned order dated 09.12.2024 (Annexure P-15) was passed by the Special Secretary (Health) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, whereby the request of the petitioner for study leave to pursue the fellowship course as such was rejected, which is a non-speaking order. 16. A perusal of Rule 50 of the CCS Rules goes on to show that study leave may be granted to a Government Servant, if the course of training or the study tour is certified to be of definite advantage to Government from the point of view of public interest and study leave would not be granted in the absence of a certificate granted by the competent authority. 17. 2 nd Proviso to Rule 50(3) provides that a medical officer may be granted study leave for prosecuting a course of post graduation study in Medical Sciences if the Director of Health Services certifies to the effect that such study shall be valuable in increasing the efficiency of such Medical Officer in the performance of his duties. 18. The other eligibility conditions are regarding the grant of study leave is that study leave may be granted to a Government servant who has completed period of probation and rendered not less than five years regular continuous service including the period of probation under the Government. This condition is not applicable to the present case as the petitioner/appellant did not have the said dis-qualification. This condition is not applicable to the present case as the petitioner/appellant did not have the said dis-qualification. 19. The next condition regarding the grant of study leave is that the study leave may be granted to a Government servant who is not due to reach the age of superannuation from the Government service within three years. The Rule further provides that study leave may be granted to a Government servant, if he executes a bond undertaking therein that he/she will serve the Government for a period of three years. 20. Rule 50(6) provides that study leave shall not be granted to a Government servant with such frequency as to remove him from contact with his regular work or to cause cadre difficulties owing to his absence on leave. 21. As noticed, the Principal has already clarified that the Officer has not taken earned leave or study leave earlier and therefore, apparently does not suffer from any disqualification. 22. It is also a matter of record that the petitioner has joined in the year 2011 and obtained his post graduate degree in June, 2018 in the field of General Surgery and thereafter joined as Senior Resident in Pediatrics Medical Super Specialty and is only 38 years old, therefore, there is no dis-qualification as such under the clauses referred to above. 23. Rule 50 of the CCS Rules reads as under:- “5 0. Conditions for grant of study leave (1) Subject to conditions specified in this Chapter, study leave may be granted to a Government servant with due regard to the exigencies of public service to enable him to undergo, in or out of India, a special course of study consisting of higher studies or specialized training in a professional or a technical subject having a direct and close connection with the sphere of his duty. (2) Study leave may also be granted:- (i) for a course of training or study tour in which a Government servant may not attend a regular academic or semi-academic course if the course of training or the study tour is certified to be of definite advantage to Government from the point of view of public interest and is related to sphere of duties of the Government servant; and (ii) for the purpose of studies connected with the framework or background of public administration subject to the conditions that- (a) the particular study or study tour should be approved by the authority competent to grant leave; and(b) the Government servant should be required to submit, on his return, a full report on the work done by him while on study leave; (iii) for the studies which may not be closely or directly connected with the work of a Government servant, but which are capable of widening his mind in a manner likely to improve his abilities as a civil servant and to equip him better to collaborate with those employed in other branches of the public service. NOTE.- Application for study leave in cases falling under clause (iii) shall be considered on merits of each case in consultation with the Department of Expenditure of the Ministry of Finance. NOTE.- Application for study leave in cases falling under clause (iii) shall be considered on merits of each case in consultation with the Department of Expenditure of the Ministry of Finance. (3) Study leave shall not be granted unless- (i) it is certified by the authority competent to grant leave that the proposed course of study or training shall be of definite advantage from the point of view of public interests; (ii) it is for prosecution of studies in subjects other than academic or literary subject: Provided that an officer of the Indian Economic Service or Indian Statistical Service may be granted study leave for prosecuting a course of study for obtaining Ph.D., on a research thesis, subject to the conditions that- (a) the subject of research and the institution at which such research is to be undertaken are got approved by the Chief Economic Adviser to the Government of India, in case the applicant is a member of the Indian Economic Service, or by the Director, Central Statistical Organization, in case the applicant is a member of the Indian Statistical Service; (b) the applicant obtains a certificate from the said authority to the effect that such study will be valuable in the matter of increasing the efficiency of the officer in the performance of his duties as a member of the Indian Economic Service or the Indian Statistical Service, as the case may be; and (c) in cases where the study is to be undertaken at a foreign university, the Applicant obtains a further certificate that the facilities for research on the particular subject chosen for study are not available at any University or other Institution in India: Provided further that a Medical Officer may be granted study leave for prosecuting a course of postgraduate study in Medical Sciences if the Director-General of Health Services certifies to the effect that such study shall be valuable in increasing the efficiency of such Medical Officer in the performance of his duties: Provided also that a specialist or a technical person may be granted study leave, on merits of each case for prosecuting a postgraduate course of study directly related to the sphere of his duty in case the Head of the Department or the Secretary to the Department or Ministry concerned certifies that the course of study shall enable the specialist or the technical person, as the case may be, to keep barest with modern development in the field of his duty, improve his technical standards and competence and thus substantially benefit the Department or Ministry. (iii) the Department of Economic Affairs of the Ministry of Finance agrees to the release of foreign exchange involved in the grant of study leave, if such leave is outside India: Provided that in releasing foreign exchange to Government servants proceeding on study leave abroad, the Department aforesaid shall satisfy itself whether such Government servant comply with the minimum educational criteria as specified in the general orders issued by the said Department from time to time regulating release of foreign exchange to persons proceeding abroad for higher studies at their expense. (4) Study leave out of India shall not be granted for the prosecution of studies in subjects for which adequate facilities exist in India or under any of the Schemes administered by the Department of Economic Affairs of the Ministry of Finance or by the Ministry of Education. (5) Study leave may be granted to a Government servant— (i) who has satisfactorily completed period of probation and has rendered not less than five years' regular continuous service including the period of probation under the Government; (ii) who is not due to reach the age of superannuation from the Government service within [three years (five years in the case of Central Health Service Officer who has been granted thirty six months study leave under sub-rule (2) of Rule 51) from] the date on which he is expected to return to duty after the expiry of the leave; and (iii) who executes a Bond as laid down in Rule 53 (4) undertaking to serve the Government for a period of [three years (five years in the case of Central Health Service Officer who has been granted thirty-six months' study leave under sub-rule (2) of Rule 51)] after the expiry of the leave.” (6) Study leave shall not be granted to a Government servant with such frequency as to remove him from contact with his regular work or to cause cadre difficulties owing to his absence on leave.” 24. Even the period of admissibility of study leave for Medical Officers is three years, subject to furnishing bond, has been outlined in Rule 51 of the CCS (Leave) Rules, as applicable to State Government employees, which reads as under:- “ 51. Even the period of admissibility of study leave for Medical Officers is three years, subject to furnishing bond, has been outlined in Rule 51 of the CCS (Leave) Rules, as applicable to State Government employees, which reads as under:- “ 51. Maximum amount of study leave (1) The maximum amount of study leave, which may be granted to a Government servant, other than Central Health Service Officers, shall- (a) ordinarily twelve months at any one time, and (b) during his entire service, twenty-four months in all (inclusive of similar kind of leave for study or training granted under any other rules). (2) In respect of Central Health Service Officers, study leave may be granted for thirty six months for acquiring postgraduate qualification, subject to the condition that a Central Health Service Officer who has been granted such study leave shall execute a bond under sub-rule (4) of Rule 53 to serve the Government for a period of five years after completion of the study course. Grant of study leave to those selected for the award of Jawaharlal Nehru Fellowship -A question has been raised whether in view of the change in the rate of leave salary during study leave in India, any revision of the terms given to Central Government employees selected for the Jawaharlal Nehru Fellowship is called for. The matter has been considered in the Ministry of Finance and the President is pleased to decide in consultation with the Comptroller and Auditor-General that in supersession of the earlier O.M. (not printed), the following terms will be given to Central Government employees who are awarded Jawaharlal Nehru Fellowship in future in relaxation of Rules 51, 57 and 59 of Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1972:- (1) They will be granted study leave for the entire period of the Fellowship. (ii) They will be entitled to the benefits admissible to them in accordance with the Fellowship and in addition, entitled to draw leave salary equal to the pay that they drew while on duty with the Government immediately before proceeding on such leave and Dearness Allowance at the Central Government rates on the leave salary admissible to them. (ii) They will be entitled to the benefits admissible to them in accordance with the Fellowship and in addition, entitled to draw leave salary equal to the pay that they drew while on duty with the Government immediately before proceeding on such leave and Dearness Allowance at the Central Government rates on the leave salary admissible to them. (iii) Where considered necessary, the official may be allowed during the period of the Fellowship, the continued use of the facility of the residential telephone officially allotted to him, subject to payment by him of the bills for the rental and call charges of the telephone. (4) Study Leave for fellowships offered by reputed Institutes.- The feasibility of bringing more Fellowships under the purview of Study Leave, on the same terms and conditions as the Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Fellowships (INMF) has been under consideration of this Department for sometime. On the basis of the inputs from various Departments/Ministries regarding fellowships offered by reputed institutions and in consultation with Department of Expenditure, it has been decided to include the Fellowships offered by (i) K.K. Birla Foundation, (ii) Indian Institutes of Management, (iii) Management Development Institute, Gurgaon and (iv) Lok Nayak Jayaprakash Narayan National Institute of Criminology and Forensic Science on the same terms as that of the fellowship offered by JNMF at present. The following terms will be offered to Central Government employees who are awarded the said fellowship in relaxation of Rules 51, 57 and 59 of Central Civil Services (Leave)Rules, 1972:- (1) They will be granted study leave for the entire period of the Fellowship; (ii) They will be entitled to the benefits admissible to them in accordance with the Fellowship and in addition, entitled to draw leave salary only (without allowance) equal to the pay that they drew while on duty with the Government immediately before proceeding on such leave. However, they will be entitled to Dearness Allowance at the Central Government, rates on the leave salary admissible to them; (iii) Where considered necessary, the official may be allowed during the period of the Fellowship, the continued use of the facility of the residential telephone officially allotted to him, subject to payment by him of the bills for the rental and call charges of the telephone.” 25. The provisions of the aforesaid Rule was not brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge, though there is reference to the Rules as such in the impugned judgment, and therefore, it has caused serious prejudice to the case of the appellant. 26 . Reliance placed upon the judgment delivered by the Apex Court in State of Punjab and others Vs. Dr. Sanjay Kumar Bansal, (2009) 15 SCC 168 by the State Counsel, would be of no help, as it was a case where the High Court had directed the administration therein to grant special leave of five years to the employee for self-employment and in such circumstances, the Apex Court had set aside the order of the High Court on the ground that it was a concession as such. As noticed above, the present case is not a case of self-employment and as per the terms as such, the employee has to give a bond as such to ensure that his services are utilized in the long run and the experience gained by him by attending the said course as such is also beneficial for the State and in the public interest. 27. Similarly, reliance placed by the State Counsel on the judgment rendered by Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Vikas Chaudhary’s case, supra, would also not give any aid to the State Counsel, as it was a case where there was provision that the study leave could only be granted, if 75% of the total strength of the teachers of the Department are available and working, but at that point of time, in that case, if the petitioner's leave was sanctioned, the percentage would have fallen to 68.18%. In such circumstances, there had been denial in the speaking order itself, which was the subject matter of challenge and resultantly, the Division Bench therein had come to the conclusion that a writ or order as such could not have been issued against the State. 28. We have already referred to the Rule in question to show that denying the petitioner the benefit, the State should have passed a reasoned order within the scope of the provisions of Rule 50 of the CCS Rules and record a well reasoned finding. On two occasions, despite the opportunities granted, the State has failed to bring their case specifically within the ambit of the Rule. On two occasions, despite the opportunities granted, the State has failed to bring their case specifically within the ambit of the Rule. Otherwise also, the Health Department would as such gain by the benefit of the higher studies of the petitioner, which he is going to obtain. Petitioner being a Medical Officer/Senior Resident is entitled for maximum study leave of three years, as per Rule 51 of the CCS Rules and the instructions issued thereafter covering study leave for fellowship, which fact has been ignored by the learned Single Judge, while passing the impugned judgment. 29. In such circumstances, we allow the present appeal and set aside the judgment of the learned Single Judge and direct the State as such to grant the study leave and NOC to the petitioner as prayed for, within a period of one week from today, in terms of the Rule in question and the writ petitioner/appellant shall comply with the conditions of the bond etc., as in Rules. 30. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.