Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010125382025 2025:GAU-AS:13836 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3305/2025 SMT. TRIBENI BORAH W/O. SRI UTPAL CHOUDHURY, R/O. RAJANI ENCLAVE, LACHIT NAGAR, 8TH BYE LANE, P.S. CHANDMARI, GUWAHATI- 781007, DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS TO BE REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, SECONDARY EDUCATION DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006 2:THE SECRETARY OF THE GOVT. OF ASSAM EDUCATION DEPTT. DISPUR DIST. KAMRUP (M) ASSAM GUWAHATI- 781006. 3:THE DIRECTOR OF SECONDARY EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006 DIST. KAMRUP (M) ASSAM. 4:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS NAGAON DIST. NAGAON ASSAM. Page No.# 2/4 5:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS GUWAHATI DIST. KAMRUP (M) ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : , MR R SARMA,MR. P SENGUPTA, Advocate for the Respondent : SC, SEC. EDU., BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO ORDER Date : 16.10.2025 Heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. P. Sengupta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. U. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, Secondary Education Department. [2.] This is the second time the petitioner is before this Court. The earlier writ petition being WP(C)/3460/2022 was disposed of vide order dated 27.05.2022, by directing the petitioner to submit a fresh representation for making a claim for regularisation of her leave period/period of absence. The petitioner accordingly submitted her representation but the same have been rejected by the impugned order dated 27.06.2023 (Annexure-11) on the ground that the petitioner could not produce proper medical certificate duly approved by the Medical Board in support of her claim to be granted extra ordinary leave for the period concerned. Aggrieved, the petitioner is again before this Court. [3.] Mr. S. Dutta, learned Senior Counsel submits that the petitioner had submitted all her medical certificates and related documents along with her application filed on 16.03.2022. Nevertheless, she also submitted certificate Page No.# 3/4 issued by the Medical Officer, S.K. Roy Civil Hospital, Hailakandi along with her representation dated 07.06.2022. The respondent authority concerned however did not accept the application for grant of extra ordinary leave for the period concerned for want of medical documents. Referring to the Leave Rules of the State Government more particularly, FR 85(a) which provides that extra ordinary leave can be granted on special circumstances when no other leave is admissible. The learned Senior Counsel also submits that extra ordinary leave can be availed either on medical certificate or without medical certificate except that the overall limit of 5 years for all kinds of leave is the maximum ceiling. He therefore submits that the rejection made by the respondent authority concerned should be interfered with by this Court and the absent period should be regularized by grant of extra ordinary leave. The learned Senior Counsel also submits that the petitioner also does not have any objection if the leave period is regularised without pay being granted. [4.] Mr. U. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, Secondary Education Department submits that respondent No.4 (Inspector of Schools, Nagaon) has filed counter affidavit stating that whatever was forwarded by the Principal of Motiram Bora Higher Secondary Balika Vidyapith, Nagaon covering a total period of 345 days was forwarded to the Inspector of Schools and therefore the respondent No.4 has played its role. The said affidavit does not however state as to why the leave period has not been regularized as permissible in law. At this stage, Mr. U. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, Secondary Education Department has produced the instructions received from the Director of Secondary Education dated 13.08.2025 and the relevant portion of the instructions is being abstracted hereunder: “As per the hearing report (copy Enclosed) it was concluded that, “……. it is not Page No.# 4/4 possible to grant Extra ordinary Leave on medical ground to the petitioner, Smt. Tribeni Bora. However, the said period may be treated as no work no pay under FR17(1) and absent may be treated as on duty only for pensionary purpose.” [5.] From the above abstract, it may be seen that hearing was conducted and it was found that grant of extra ordinary leave on medical ground was not possible and the said period can be treated as no work no pay under FR 17(1) and the period of absence treated as on duty for pensionary purpose only. As submitted by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner also agrees to forgo her pay for the period of absence and considering the fact that the petitioner is due to retire on 31st of October, 2025, the respondents in terms of the above instructions should act upon the same by treating the absent period as on duty for the purpose of pension. [6.] Its needless to say the impugned order dated 27.06.2023 stands interfered with. [7.] The writ petition stands disposed of. [8.] The instructions produced by the learned Standing Counsel, Secondary Education Department shall be kept on record and marked as ‘X’ for identification. JUDGE Comparing Assistant