HON'BLE SRI JUSTI CE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRI T PETI TI ON No.22922 of 2019

ORDER:

The petitioner, an Inspector of Police in the Telangana State, seeks a declaration entitling them to Special Disability Leave for the period from 23-08-2015 to 03-01-2016, challenging the rejection orders dated 30- 07-2018 and 19-08-2016 as arbitrary, illegal, and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner met with an accident on duty on 23-08-2015, resulting in significant injuries, and was treated at Kurnool Omni Hospital and Apollo Hospital, Hyderabad, until their discharge on 30-08-2015. After taking medical leave and reporting for duty with a fitness certificate on 04-01-2016, the petitioner submitted a representation on 05-01-2016 requesting that the sick leave be treated as Special Disability Leave, which was initially regularized under proceedings dated 19-01-2016, although with a clerical error. A further request made on 24-06-2017 for Special Disability Leave was rejected on 19-08-2016 by the 5^th Respondent, citing a delay in submitting the Application, despite the petitioner’s earlier submission. The petitioner’s representation to the Government on 31-05-2018 was also rejected without explanation by the 1^st Respondent through Memo No. 6454/Ser. II/A1/2018. The petitioner argues that the provisions of F.R. 83 were misinterpreted, as the disability occurred within the prescribed period and was promptly reported. The petitioner sustained severe injuries, including multiple fractures and an epidural hematoma, and contends that the rejection orders are unjust, as the Government retains discretion to grant Special Disability Leave even after the prescribed three-month period. The petitioner requests the Court to declare entitlement to Special Disability Leave for the specified period and to set aside the rejection orders as unlawful and contrary to F.R. 83.

2. Heard Mr. V. Ravichandran, learned counsel for the petitioner; and learned Government Pleader for Services (Home). Perused the record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, while making submissions on the lines of writ affidavit, would essentially contend that the petitioner, a serving Inspector of Police, is entitled to Special Disability Leave for the period from 23-08-2015 to 03-01-2016, as they sustained serious injuries while on duty on 23-08-2015, including multiple fractures and an epidural hematoma. The petitioner promptly reported for duty after recovering, and submitted an initial representation on 05- 01-2016, requesting that the sick period be treated as Special Disability Leave, which was wrongfully rejected by the respondents. It is argued that the rejection orders dated 19-08-2016 and 30-07-2018 are arbitrary and illegal, as they misinterpret the provisions of F.R. 83, which allows for Special Disability Leave even if the disability manifests after three months, provided there is promptness in reporting. The petitioner acted with due promptitude by submitting the request in January 2016, and the subsequent representation made in June 2017 was only a continuation of the initial application. The petitioner further contends that the rejection orders fail to assign any valid reasons, and the denial of leave violates the principles of natural justice and is discriminatory, contrary to Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the petitioner seeks a declaration entitling them to Special Disability Leave and the quashing of the rejection orders as arbitrary, unjust, and in violation of legal provisions.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent, basing on the counter affidavit, essentially contends that the petitioner's claims are without merit and should be dismissed. The petitioner’s allegations regarding entitlement to Special Disability Leave are incorrect, as the petitioner was not on official duty at the time of the accident, which occurred while he was traveling in his private vehicle. This fact is corroborated by the FIR (Cr.No. 94/2015, un