CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH LUCKNOW ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 332/00630 of 2025 Dated, this 2nd day of December, 2025 Hon’ble Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Member-Administrative Sameer Verma, aged about 53 Years, S/o Late Dr. S. K. Verma, R/o Flat no. 1204, Tower-1, Multistorey Officer’s Apartment, Butler Palace Colony, Lucknow-226001.

…..Applicant By Advocate: Shri Praveen Kumar VERSUS

1. Union of India through Secretary, Department of Personnel and Training, Government of India, North Block, New Delhi.

2. State of Uttar Pradesh through its Principal Secretary, Department of Personnel and Appointment, Civil Secretariat, Lucknow.

3. The Chief Secretary, Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lok Bhavan Civil Secretariat, Lucknow.

…..Respondent By Advocate: Shri S. S. Rajawat Smt. Prayagmati Gupta

ORDER (ORAL)

Per Hon’ble Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Member-Administrative In this case relating to study leave, the applicant has sought following reliefs:

“1. To pass appropriate orders granting/sanctioning study leave to the applicant, having due regard to the permission granted by the Competent Authority to apply for the course, as prayed for in the application for grant of study leave.

2. To quash the impugned order dated 08.10.2025 (contained as Annexure No. A-1 to this OA), with all consequential benefits, impugned order being arbitrary.

3. Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit, just and proper under the circumstances of the case, may also be passed.

4. Cost of the present case.”

2. The applicant, who is an officer belonging to 2002 batch of the Indian Administrative Service, sought permission from respondents vide letter dated 18.02.2025 for applying for Post Graduate Programme in Management for Senior Executives (PGPMAX) at Indian School of Business (ISB), Hyderabad. He was granted the permission to apply for the said programme vide order dated 28.02.2025. In the meantime, the applicant was posted as Inspector General, Stamps and Registration, Government of Uttar Pradesh vide order dated 14.04.2025 and he was subsequently put on wait list vide order dated 19.06.2025. The applicant accepted the offer of admission from ISB, Hyderabad and deposited Rs. 3.57 lakh with ISB, Hyderabad for the course on 14.05.2025. The applicant, vide letter dated 24.06.2025, requested respondent no. 2 for granting study leave from 04.07.2025 to 31.12.2026. He sent another request on 18.07.2025 to respondent no. 2 for grant of study leave and informing that he was proceeding to Hyderabad to attend the course in anticipation of grant of the study leave. The respondents sought explanation from the applicant vide letter dated 19.08.2025 for proceeding to Hyderabad without sanction of study leave to which he replied on 08.09.2025 followed by a detailed explanation dated 15.09.2025. In the meantime, the applicant alongwith some other officers, was required to attend a briefing meeting for Central Observers on 03.10.2025 vide order dated 29.09.2025 of the respondent no. 2. Subsequently, following request made by the applicant, he was exempted from attending the briefing meeting on 03.10.2025 as communicated by respondent no. 2 vide order dated 30.09.2025. Respondent no. 2, then, issued order dated 08.10.2025 posting the applicant as Secretary, Department of Planning and director General, Economics and Statistics in Government of Uttar Pradesh.

Aggrieved, the applicant has preferred this OA.

3. Heard both the parties. Learned counsel for the applicant lays emphasis on the permission granted to the applicant to apply for PGPMAX, the amount deposited by the applicant for the same with ISB, the applicant’s exemption from election related duty and the arbitrariness in withholding sanction for study leave without assigning any reason by the respondents. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents emphasises that permission was granted only to apply for the course in ISB, Hyderabad and not for the study leave per se; that the discretion to grant leave rests