An employee has the right to seek curtailment of sanctioned leave and rejoin duty, barring statutory prohibitions.

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 10^th day of February, 2026 The petitioner is a duly approved Full Time Menial working in the 5^th respondent's aided Higher Secondary School since 01.06.2016 without break in service. He was granted Leave Without Allowance (LWA) for 119 days from 02.04.2025 to 29.09.2025 by the Headmaster, who is the competent authority to sanction leave up to the prescribed limit, under the Kerala Service Rules and Government Orders.

2. Subsequently, since further leave beyond the permissible limit of the Head of Office was required, the petitioner was directed to submit a consolidated application seeking LWA from 02.04.2025 to 31.03.2026 under Appendix XIIA of KSR. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted Ext.P2 consolidated leave application dated 26.06.2025. The 6^th respondent-Headmaster forwarded the same to the District Educational Officer, cancelling the earlier sanction and recommending revised leave up to 31.03.2026 as per Ext.P3. The District Educational Officer in turn forwarded the proposal to the Director of General Education for orders as per Ext.P4. Thus, the request for extended leave is still pending consideration before the higher authority.

3. Meanwhile, due to change in circumstances and failure to secure alternative employment, the petitioner decided to curtail the leave and rejoin duty. He submitted Ext.P5 representation dated 29.12.2025 before the Manager seeking permission to rejoin duty with effect from 01.01.2026 after cancelling the unavailed portion of leave. However, instead of permitting rejoining, the matter continued to be processed administratively.

4. The Director of General Education sought reports regarding the revised leave application by Ext.P6 communication dated 04.12.2025, which was forwarded by the Headmaster on 31.01.2026. No order has been passed permitting the petitioner to rejoin duty. The refusal / inaction in permitting rejoining has the effect of keeping the petitioner out of service without any lawful order of termination or suspension.

5. The petitioner contends that the employer- employee relationship continues, leave does not serve service, and there is no rule under KSR prohibiting curtailment of leave and rejoining. The denial of permission to rejoin is arbitrary, violative of Service Rules and principles of natural justice and results in grave civil consequences, contends the petitioner.

6. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 1 to 4. Notice to respondents 5 and 6 is dispensed with in view of the nature of the relief to be granted in this writ petition.

7. The petitioner is a Full Time Menial in the High School Section. The contention of the petitioner is that the action of the respondents in not permitting the petitioner to rejoin duty after cancelling the unavailed portion of Leave Without Allowance is arbitrary. According to the petitioner, once leave is sanctioned, an employee has a corresponding right to seek curtailment of leave and to rejoin duty, unless there is a statutory prohibition.

8. Be that as it may, the petitioner has now preferred Ext.P8 representation before the 4^th respondent in this regard. As a representation is pending before the 4^th respondent-District Educational Officer, I am of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the 4^th respondent to take appropriate decision on Ext.P8.

The writ petition is therefore disposed of directing the

4^th respondent to consider Ext.P8 representation and pass appropriate orders thereon within a period of one month after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the Manager.

Sd/-