Serial No. 01 Supplementary List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG WP(C) No. 486 of 2024 Date of Decision :05.03.2026 Shri Gopal Kumar, S/o Shri. Murari Ram, Permanent resident of Rankakhurd, Ward No. 7, P.O. Rankaraj, Garhwa District, Jharkhand.

…Petitioner(s)

-Versus-

1. Union of India Represented by the Secretary to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi.

2. The Director General, Border Security Force, BSF HQ, New Delhi.

3. The Inspector General, BSF Frontier HQ, Meghalaya, Shillong. …Respondent(s)

Coram:

Hon’ble Mr. Justice H.S. Thangkhiew, Judge.

Appearance:

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. S. Dey, Adv.

Ms. S. Marpna, Adv.

For the Respondent(s) : Dr. N. Mozika, DSGI with Ms. M. Myrchiang, Adv.

____________________________________________________________

i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No Law journals etc:

ii) Whether approved for publication Yes/No in press:

JUDGMENT AND ORDER

1. The petitioner who is currently posted as Head Constable (Fitter) being aggrieved with the rejection of his application for Study Leave to pursue a Diploma in Civil Engineering by the respondents, is before this Court by the instant writ petition for quashing of the rejection letter dated 28.11.2024, and for directions to grant NOC for Study Leave to enable him to pursue the Diploma in Civil Engineering.

2. The other surrounding facts are that the petitioner having joined service in 2015, being desirous of being promoted to the next post of SI (Civil) upon due completion of tenure of service, was intending to pursue a Diploma in Civil Engineering, as for being eligible to the promotional post, a Diploma in Civil Engineering was required. The petitioner had then applied for admission in Sai Nath University at Ranchi and had secured an offer for admission for the said 2(two) year Diploma Course in Civil Engineering (Lateral Entry) from the concerned University whereafter, he submitted his application for grant of permission from the respondents on 31.07.2024. The petitioner’s application was then returned for want of certain conditions that were required to be fulfilled which the petitioner after compliance, were re-submitted. Thereafter, after certain other clarifications and documents as required had been submitted, the respondents favourably recommended the petitioner’s application and forwarded the same for further process. However, on 10.10.2024, it was communicated that the petitioner’s case was not covered under the applicable Service Rules and this also resulted in the cancellation of his admission secured at Sai Nath University, as he was required to obtain the NOC by 15.10.2024. However, it appears as brought on record by affidavit, the petitioner has again secured admission to pursue the Diploma in Civil Engineering at Babu Dinesh Singh University, Jharkhand for the Academic Session, 2026-27. The only issue therefore, is to examine the rejection of the application by the respondents, as to whether the same is arbitrary and unreasonable, or whether the same was as per, and in accordance with the prevalent Service Rules, in this case, the CCS (Leave) Rules, 1972.

3. Mr. S. Dey, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondents while rejecting the application for Study Leave, have mis- interpreted Rule-50 of the CCS (Leave) Rules, 1972, overlooked Rules 50 (1) & (2) and have also failed to appreciate that the proviso to Rule-50, may not be applicable as the petitioner is not a Technical or a Specialist person. It is contended by the learned counsel that the petitioner’s course is covered under the said Rules, inasmuch as, the same is a Special Course of study consisting of Higher Studies in a Professional or Technical subject, having a direct and close connection with his sphere of duty, directly connected with his work, and is capable of widening his mind in a manner likely to improve his abilities to equip him better to collaborate with those employed in other Branches. It is further submitted that under Rule-51