Anil Kumar Sharma vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Headnote:(A) M.P. Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1977 - Rules 6 and 42 - Grant of study leave - Whether leave can be claimed as a matter of right - Grant of leave, including study leave, is not a right of any employee or government servant, but a privilege to be extended depending upon the facts and circumstances of the case (Paras 11 and 12) - Under Rule 42, study leave is granted with due regard to the exigencies of public service to enable the employee to undergo a course of study of definite advantage to the government from the point of view of public interest - Career advancement of the government servant is not the paramount consideration in the grant of study leave (Para 13).

(B) Administrative Law - No Objection Certificate (NOC) - Scope and effect - Where the application for leave is required to be processed through the head of an office to the competent administrative department, the NOC granted by the head of office is merely the first step toward processing the application and does not confer a right to pursue the course until the leave is formally sanctioned by the competent authority (Para 16).

(C) Executive Instructions - Applicability of subsequent circulars - Since leave is not a right and the formal sanction is subject to the instructions of the competent authority, subsequent circulars issued prior to the final sanction of leave are applicable, and preliminary permissions can be cancelled based on such revised guidelines (Para 18).

Facts of the case:
A government employee serving as a lecturer obtained a preliminary no objection certificate (NOC) from the principal of his college to pursue a Ph.D. course, subject to leave rules and specific circulars. The employee subsequently joined the course and was transferred to another college on deputation. Following the issuance of a new circular prioritizing candidates pursuing Master's degrees over those pursuing doctoral degrees, the preliminary NOC was cancelled. The employee challenged the cancellation, asserting that he had already taken admission and deposited fees based on the NOC.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the employee had deposited the fees for the course prior to the grant of the NOC; therefore, he had not changed his position based on the NOC. It was further observed that the principal of the college was not the competent authority to sanction study leave; only the administrative department possessed such power. Consequently, the NOC was not a final order of sanction.

Issues: Whether the grant of study leave is a matter of right for a government servant and whether a preliminary NOC issued by a head of office creates a vested right to pursue a course that overrides subsequent instructions issued by the competent administrative authority.

Ratio Decidendi: Study leave is a privilege and not a right, governed by the exigencies of public service and the benefit to the government rather than the career advancement of the employee. A preliminary NOC does not constitute a final sanction of leave; as such, the competent authority may cancel such permission based on updated instructions and policy priorities before the leave is formally granted.

Result: Petition fails and is hereby dismissed.

Legal Category Hierarchy

1. Cancellation of NOC for pursuing Ph.D. course — Challenge to — Claim for study leave under Rules. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 )

2. Petitioner argued cancellation illegal and retrospective; State argued study leave not a right and NOC not final. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 )

3. Writ petition dismissed; cancellation of NOC upheld; liberty to approach for alternate leave. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 )

4. Can a government servant claim study leave as a matter of right?

No, study leave is a privilege, not a right. Its grant depends on exigencies of public service and administrative discretion under Rule 42. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 21 )

5. Does a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from a college principal confer a right to pursue higher studies without sanctioned study leave?

No, NOC is only a preliminary step; study leave must be sanctioned by the competent authority; NOC does not create any vested right. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 )

6. Are subsequent administrative instructions applicable to pending applications for study leave before sanction?

Yes, since the leave is not yet sanctioned, the government servant does not have a vested right, and later instructions are applicable. (Para 18 , 21 )

7. What is the primary consideration for granting study leave under Rule 42 of the M.P. Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1977?

The proposed course must be of definite advantage to the government from the point of view of public interest; career advancement of the employee is secondary. (Para 13 , 19 )

ORDER :

ASHISH SHROTI, J.

Petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the order dated 31/8/2022 (Annexure P/1), whereby, the NOC granted to him earlier for pursuing Ph.D. course, has been cancelled. He has also prayed for a direction to respondents to extend him the benefit of study leave as per Circular dated 7/10/2015 and as per M.P. Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1977.

2. Petitioner is possessed of B.E. (Electricals), M.Tech. (Electricals) qualifications. He was initially appointed on the post of Lecturer (Electricals) on 8/10/2010 in Govt. Polytechnic College, Nowgong, Chattarpur. The appointment was on contract for a period of three years. On completion of three years, he was regularized in service w.e.f. 2/11/2013 vide order dated 25/4/2015.

3. In order to pursue Ph.D. course, petitioner applied for permission from the Principal of the College on 31/3/2022. The Principal accorded permission vide letter dated 27/4/2022. The permission was however subject to Clause अ,अ(1),अ(2) of Circular dated 7/10/2015 and the M.P. Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1977 (for short "Rules of 1977"). The petitioner contends that, based upon NOC given by Principal of Nowgong College, he joined the Ph.D. course and started pursuing the same in Tagore University, Raisen.

4. Petitioner was then sent on deputation on 20/05/2022 to Govt. Polytechnic College, Datia. This was done pursuant to the instructions issued by the Directorate of Technical Education and Skill Development Department. Petitioner accordingly joined in the College at Datia and is presently posted there. The Principal of the College at Nowgong wrote to the Principal of College at Datia on 16/6/2022 expressing his no objection, if the petitioner is permitted to pursue his Ph.D. Course. This was done in view of the fact that permitting the petitioner to pursue course may effect the teaching work of the College at Datia.

5. Principal of the College, thereafter issued the impugned communication dated 31/8/2022 (Annexure P/1), whereby, the permission granted by him earlier has been cancelled. This has been done in view of certain instructions issued by the Directorate vide Circular dated 4/8/2022. Challenging this communication, petitioner has filed this writ petition praying for aforementioned reliefs.

6. Challenging the impugned action of the respondents, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that cancellation of NOC based upon the circular issued subsequently is illegal inasmuch as the Circular issued on 4/8/2022 would not have the retrospective effect. It is his submission that no reason has been assigned to reject the NOC to the petitioner and further that since the petitioner is now not working in the College at Nowgong, petitioner's going on study leave would not adversely effect the work at Nowgong. He further submitted that Circular dated 7/10/2015 provides for engaging guest faculty in case any permanent faculty has gone on study leave. Learned counsel further submitted that the impugned communication has been issued by the respondent no.6 without any logic and by misinterpreting the circular dated 4/8/2022.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that Ph.D. course would be beneficial for the petitioner for his career advancement inasmuch as Ph.D. is one of the qualification for further promotion. He submitted that as per Rule 42 of the Leave Rules, 1977, he is eligible and entitled for study leave for which the NOC was already issued by respondent no.6 in his favour. He further submitted that acting upon the NOC, the petitioner has taken admission to pursue Ph.D. course and has also deposited fees for the same. Therefore, cancellation of NOC is not permissible. It is his further submission that since petitioner is presently working in College at Datia, respondent no.6 was not having jurisdiction to cancel the NOC. With the aforesaid submission, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for setting aside of the impugned communication and for restoring the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(MP) 545

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR
ASHISH SHROTI, J.
Anil Kumar Sharma – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 21103 of 2022
Decided On : 25-02-2026

Study leave for government employees is a privilege, not a right, contingent upon public interest and service exigencies. A preliminary no-objection certificate does not create a vested right to pursue a course until the competent administrative authority formally sanctions the leave.

Legal Category Hierarchy

Table of Contents

4. Can a government servant claim study leave as a matter of right?

5. Does a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from a college principal confer a right to pursue higher studies without sanctioned study leave?

6. Are subsequent administrative instructions applicable to pending applications for study leave before sanction?

7. What is the primary consideration for granting study leave under Rule 42 of the M.P. Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1977?

Judicial Analysis

2026 Supreme(MP) 545

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIORASHISH SHROTI, J.Anil Kumar Sharma – Petitioner Versus The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others – RespondentsWrit Petition No. 21103 of 2022 Decided On : 25-02-2026

Study leave for government employees is a privilege, not a right, contingent upon public interest and service exigencies. A preliminary no-objection certificate does not create a vested right to pursue a course until the competent administrative authority formally sanctions the leave.

Legal Category Hierarchy

Table of Contents

4. Can a government servant claim study leave as a matter of right?

5. Does a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from a college principal confer a right to pursue higher studies without sanctioned study leave?

6. Are subsequent administrative instructions applicable to pending applications for study leave before sanction?

7. What is the primary consideration for granting study leave under Rule 42 of the M.P. Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1977?

Cases Referred (3)

Judicial Analysis

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR
ASHISH SHROTI, J.
Anil Kumar Sharma – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 21103 of 2022
Decided On : 25-02-2026