JUDGMENT

P.B.Suresh Kumar, J.

This appeal is directed against the judgment dated

02.07.2021 in W.P.(C) No.1474 of 2021. The appellant was the petitioner in the writ petition. Parties are referred to in this judgment for convenience as they appear in the writ petition.

2. The petitioner is a Lab Assistant in the service of the Kerala Agricultural University (the University). On 12.02.2019, while the petitioner was working at the Rice Research Station of the University at Vytilla in Ernakulam District, he felt certain physical distress and was consequently taken to the General Hospital, Ernakulam. While he was undergoing treatment in the General Hospital, it is stated that the petitioner had shown indications of mental disorder and he was accordingly taken to the Government Mental Health Centre, Thrissur, under orders of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam. After the treatment, the petitioner reported for duty on 07.03.2019 with an application for earned leave for the period from 13.02.2019 to 06.03.2019. The petitioner was however not permitted to rejoin duty on 07.03.2019 on the ground that he needs to obtain a fitness certificate from the Medical Board. He was accordingly referred to the District Medical Board, Ernakulam for the said purpose. The Medical Board thereupon examined the petitioner and certified that the petitioner is not suffering from any psychiatric disorder or illness. Ext.P9 is the certificate issued by the Medical Board on 12.04.2019. As it has not been stated in Ext.P9 certificate that the petitioner is fit to rejoin duty, he was not permitted to rejoin duty even thereafter. Instead, he was called upon to produce a fitness certificate from the Government Mental Health Centre, Thrissur. The petitioner thereupon approached the said Mental Health Centre for the fitness certificate and obtained Ext.P10 fitness certificate on 04.07.2019 to the effect that he was fit to resume his duties as on 07.03.2019 itself. In spite of Ext.P10 fitness certificate, the petitioner was not permitted to rejoin duty immediately. Instead, he was permitted to rejoin only on 31.08.2019, that too at the College of Agriculture, Padannakkad in Kazaragod District. After rejoining duty, the petitioner preferred a representation to the University for disbursement of his salary for the period from 13.2.2019 to 31.08.2019. On the said representation, the second respondent issued Ext.P13 order directing the petitioner to prefer application for leave for the period from 13.02.2019 for regularising his absence from service. In Ext.P13, it has been stated that out of the said period, the period from 13.02.2019 to 04.07.2019 can be regularised only as medical leave. Ext.P13 order of the second respondent was under challenge in the writ petition mainly on the ground that since the petitioner has reported for duty on 07.03.2019 itself and since he was not permitted to rejoin duty for reasons not attributable to him, the period from 07.03.2019 to 31.08.2019 is to be treated as duty, duly performed by him. The petitioner has also sought in the writ petition, directions to the University to regularise his service from 13.02.2019 to 31.08.2019 as duty and to pay salary for the said period. As far as the period from 13.02.2019 to 06.03.2019 is concerned, the case of the petitioner is that the said period can be regularised by granting him earned leave. According to the petitioner, the direction in Ext.P13 order that the petitioner should apply for eligible leave for the period from 13.02.2019 to

31.08.2019 for regularising the absence is illegal and arbitrary.

3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents in the writ petition contending that in terms of Rule 118 A of Part 1 of the Kerala Service Rules, when a competent authority entertains genuine doubts about the fitness of an officer, it may refer him to a Medical Board for expert medical opinion. It is in light of the said provision that the petitioner was referred to the District Medic