Administrative authorities possess the discretion to determine selection criteria for study leave when resources are limited. Judicial review is restricted to cases where such policy decisions are demonstrably arbitrary; seniority remains a legally permissible and non-arbitrary basis for allocating limited educational opportunities among eligible staff members.

JUDGMENT

TEJAS KARIA, J. (ORAL)

1. The present Appeal has been filed challenging the Judgement dated 24.12.2025 (“Impugned Judgement”) passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. (C) 19730/2025 (“Writ Petition”), whereby the Appellant’s Writ Petition has been dismissed on the ground that administrative or policy decision taken by Respondent No. 1 - Hospital in granting No Objection Certificate (“NOC”) to Respondent No. 5 for pursuing higher studies under ‘Sponsored Quota’ and rejecting the similar NOC to the Appellant on the ground of inter se seniority between the Appellant and Respondent No. 5 is a relevant factor for the issuance of NOC.

2. The learned Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the Appellant secured the All India Rank of 4358 as compared to Respondent No. 5, who has secured Rank of 10032 in the All India Entrance Test conducted for selecting the candidates for pursuing their Post Graduate (“PG”) courses under the sponsored category. It was submitted that the Appellant joined as a Medical Officer at Directorate General of Health Services, Government of NCT of Delhi and after serving for about one and half year, the Appellant was transferred to Respondent No. 1 - Hospital in April, 2022. After completion of five years in service on 17.09.2025, the Appellant became eligible for Study Leave as per Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1972 (“Rules”). The Appellant applied for permission of Respondent No. 1 - Hospital to appear for All India Entrance Test for PG courses conducted by All India Institute of Medical Sciences (“AIIMS”), New Delhi. On 30.10.2025, Respondent No. 1- Hospital issued the Sponsorship Certificate in favour of the Appellant.

3. Having secured All India Rank of 4358, in the counselling / seat allocation, the Appellant was allocated seat in Nuclear Medicine at Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (“PGIMER”), Chandigarh under the sponsored category and an offer letter dated 18.12.2025 was issued to the Appellant to join PGIMER, Chandigarh for pursuing his post-graduation in Nuclear Medicine on the sponsored seat category. The Appellant requested Respondent No. 1 - Hospital to issue relieving orders and NOC and to Respondent No. 2 for grant of Study Leave. However, Respondent No. 1 - Hospital vide Office Memorandum dated 19.12.2025 (“Impugned OM”) rejected the request for grant of NOC to the Appellant on the ground that in terms of the prevalent practice, the senior doctor in Respondent No. 1 - Hospital has been recommended for grant of Study Leave / NOC for pursuing PG course since only three medical officers are allowed to join PG courses at a given time in terms of Office Memorandum dated 02.11.2012 (“2012 OM”) issued by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India. As there were already two Medical Officers pursuing the higher studies, Respondent No. 5 was granted NOC being senior to the Appellant and, consequently, the Appellant was denied the Study Leave as well as NOC by Respondent No. 1 - Hospital.

4. Being aggrieved by the Impugned OM, the Appellant submitted a Representation dated 19.12.2025 to Respondent No. 2 requesting that his application for Study Leave be accepted considering the meritorious rank secured by the Appellant in the examination. The Appellant also preferred the Writ Petition challenging the Impugned OM on 23.12.2025. Vide Impugned