The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the concept of 'on duty' and 'causal connection' in determining eligibility for disability leave, emphasizing the entitlement to Special Disability Leave under the CCS (Leave) Rules.

SANJEEV NARULA, J.

1. The Petitioner who is working as Constable with Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) has filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the orders passed by the Respondents declining to regularize 317 days of leave as special disability leave.

Factual Background

2. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present petition are that the Petitioner applied for leave for going to his home at Village Khandwa on 29th November 2010. His request was acceded to and he was granted leave from 30th November, 2010 to 5th December, 2010. Accordingly, the Petitioner availing the four days sanctioned leave, left for his home on 30th November, 2010 at about 6.00 pm. Unfortunately while crossing the service road in front of INA Market, New Delhi a motor cyclist who was driving at high speed hit him. As a result of the impact, Petitioner suffered serious injuries and fractured his leg. He was admitted at Safdarjung Hospital and was given the necessary treatment.

3. The Company Commander, CISF sent an accident report to the Unit Commandant on 1st December, 2010 and vide letter dated 22nd December, 2010, Petitioner was granted one month medical leave. This was followed by a letter recommending two months’ home rest w.e.f. 22nd January, 2011. Since the Petitioner was still undergoing treatment, after the expiry of one month’s home rest, he requested for three months’ extension. This request was accepted by the Respondents. Petitioner was again admitted in Hospital and had to undergo another operation on his leg on 11th July, 2011. This was also brought to the notice of the Commandant vide letter dated 12th July, 2011 written by the Assistant Commandant of the CISF to the Commandant of the CISF. By Note-sheet dated 19th July, 2011, Petitioner was recommended home rest, as he was not in a position to move.

4. A leave certificate dated 16th August, 2011 was issued to the Petitioner approving 28 days leave from 16th August, 2011 to 13th September, 2011 followed by a Note sheet dated 13th September, 2011 recommending him one month’s rest. On 13th October, 2011, Petitioner submitted his fitness certificate and two days later on 15th October, 2011, the Office of the Deputy Commandant ordered to conduct an inquiry to ascertain the reason of the Petitioner’s accident and the resultant home rest. The concerned Officer submitted his report on 26th November, 2011 and observed that Petitioner required long medical leave on account of the treatment being received by the Petitioner.

5. Thereafter, the Deputy Inspector General vide letter dated 17th October, 2013 sought certain clarifications from the Petitioner for regularization of his medical leave. On requisite information being provided, CISF vide letter dated 3rd April 2014, informed the Petitioner that the Court of Inquiry conducted by the GBS New Delhi has observed that “since the injury suffered by Constable Bhagu Ram was while going on leave, hence the injury is not attributable to service.” Based on the finding that the accident took place while the Petitioner was on leave and not on official duty, Petitioner was held not eligible for Special Disability Leave for the sick/medical rest period of 317 days w.e.f. 30th November, 2010 to 12th October, 2011.

6. Dissatisfied with the above response, Petitioner preferred an appeal before DG Headquarter. However, the said appeal was also rejected vide order dated 22nd December, 2014. The revision petition filed against the said order was also rejected but on the ground that there was no provision to consider the same.

7. The Petitioner has approached this Court assailing the orders dated 3rd April, 2014 and 22nd December, 2014.

Submissions of the parties

8. The learned counsel for the Petitioner argued that the action of the Respondent declining to regularize his disability leave is illegal, as the Petitioner is a member of Armed Paramilitary Forces and should be treated on duty even when he pr