The main legal point established in the judgment is that entitlement to relief is determined by compliance with the relevant rules and timelines, and failure to meet such requirements may result in the denial of the relief sought.

1. By this writ petition, the petitioner, a member of the Rajasthan Judicial Services, since retired, seeks direction upon the respondent i.e., the Rajasthan High Court to grant commuted leave on medical ground from 210.1989 to 210.1989 and to accept the option form submitted by the petitioner in the matter of pay scale with effect from 012.1986 with all consequential benefits.

2. As regards the first relief regarding grant of commuted leave on medical ground, the relevant facts are these:

3. The petitioner was transferred from the post of Judicial Magistrate, Ajmer to Dholpur. He has not disclosed the date of order; it is however said that he was relieved from Ajmer on 110.1989. He submitted joining on 210.1998. Ten days joining time had expired in the meantime on 210.1989. According to the petitioner, on 110.1989 he had met an accident. On 011.1989, he applied for extension of joining time in terms of Rule 5(5) read with Rule 9 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Joining Time) Rules, 1981. On 211.1989, he was asked to apply for extra ordinary leave. On 012.1989, the petitioner submitted application for commuted leave on medical ground. The application was rejected and on 02.03.1990 he was again asked to apply for extra ordinary leave.

4. The provisions relating to joining time are contained in Rule 5 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Joining Time) Rules, 1981. It is not in dispute that the joining time commences from the date of relinquishment of charge of the old post. Under Sub-rule (5), joining time can be extended subject to certain limits mentioned in Sub-rule (4) where the joining is not possible due to disruption of transport because of strike or natural calamities.

5. The case of the petitioner apparently does not fall within the framework of Sub-rule (5) of Rule 5 and that is why understandably, he submitted a fresh application for grant of commuted leave on medical ground. But in the absence of any provision relating to grant of commuted leave on medical ground, that could not be allowed either and the application was rightly rejected and he was asked to apply for extra ordinary leave.

6. It is relevant to mention here that in terms of Rule 8 of the said rules, if the Government servant does not join his duties within the joining time, he is not only not entitled to pay after end of the joining time, the period of absence from duty after the expiry of joining time amounts to interruption in the service involving forfeiture of post service unless, on satisfactory reasons being furnished such absence is regularised by grant of extension in the normal period of joining time under the Rules in the circumstances narrated in Rule 5(5) or is commuted into extraordinary leave by the competent authority.

7. In view of the provisions of Rule 8, the petitioner was rightly asked to apply for extraordinary leave. The direction apparently was in favour of the petitioner. It is plain that if the period of absence is not regularised, the person exposes himself to the consequences envisaged in Rule 8. We are not able to appreciate as to why the petitioner should make any grievance of the direction to apply for extraordinary leave. In the circumstances, the desired relief in the matter of leave cannot be granted to him.

8. As regards the other relief relating to acceptance of opinion for the pay scale, the facts are that the Rajasthan Civil Service (Revised Pay Scales) Rules, 1987, published in the Official Gazette on 02.02.1987, came into force with effect from 01.09.1986. Rule 9 of the said Rules contained an option clause, in terms of which the Government servant could opt for the existing scale. The rule stipulated that if he does not opt, the new scales would be applicable to him. Rule 10 laid down the manner of exercise of option. It provided that within two months of publications of the Rules in the Official Gazette, the option as envisaged in Rule 9 should reach the authority specified in Sub-rule (2)(Kha). A longer per