A.K.Banerjee, J. - (1.) Writ petitioner is a Medical Officer of Eastern Coal Fields Limited having MBBS qualification. For further studies the writ petitioner applied for permission to sit for the entrance examination. Such leave was granted by the respondent authority. In August, 1991 writ petitioner became successful in the qualifying examination conducted by National Board Examination. To sit for the final examination he was to complete three years training in any recognized Hospital/Medical College. Accordingly, writ petitioner duly applied before the respondent authority by his letter dated 9th January, 1992 for three years study leave so that he could join the regional Medical College, Silchar, Assam. Reminders were given by the writ petitioner. Unlimately, by a letter dated 6th November, 1993 such prayer for leave was rejected. As his application for leave was rejected the writ petitioner by a letter dated 7th March, 1994 addressed to the Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Eastern Coal Fields Limited resigned from service. His letter of resignation was also not accepted and the decision of the authority was communicated to him by a letter dated 17th May, 1995. By this time the writ petitioner was continuing his post graduate studies by taking casual leave medical leave from time to time. On 10th July, 1995 the writ petitioner informed the authority since his letter of resignation was not accepted he would join his duty after completion of the three years period. However, by a letter dated 27th November, 1995 the respondent authority informed the writ petitioner that he had lost his service w.e.f. 28th May, 1995 because of "loss of lien". The writ petitioner immediately moved this Court. However, on the assurance of the local Member of Parliament the writ petition was withdrawn. Since the dispute remain unresolved the present writ petition has been filed.
(2.) Mr. Kashi Kanta Moitra, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner raised the following points:- (i) When permission to sit for the qualifying examination was given by the respondent authority it was expected that the respondent authority would consider the application for study leave and such leave cold not be denied except on cogent grounds. According to him, since permission was granted it was expected that the study leave would be granted. After the permission having been given, the writ petitioner sat for the qualifying examination on the expectation that he would be allowed to continue his studies provided he could qualify. (ii) The letter of resignation was submitted on 7th March, 1994. The respondent authority took more than one year time and intimated by their letter dated 7th May, 1995 that the letter of resignation could not be accepted. (iii) Since the letter of resignation was not accepted the writ petitioner was entitled to join. (iv) There could not be any automatic termination of his service without any proceedings being initiated against him. (v) There could not be any loss of lien in absence of any lien being exercised.
(3.) Mr. Moitra in support of his contention cited the following judgments:- AIR 1966, Supreme Court, Page 1363 AIR 1971, Supreme Court, Page 1409 1976, Vol-1, Service law Reports, Page 191 AIR 1962, Supreme Court, Page 600;