Chhattisgarh: On October 1, 2026, the Chhattisgarh High Court ruled that a new rule that allows longer study leave cannot be applied to the candidates who were granted study leave before the new rule came into force.
On Thursday, Justice Bibhu Datta Guru discharged some petitions which were filed by certain doctors who were asking to extend their 24 months' study leave to 36 months. They were asking for an extension of one year; however, the court dismissed it.
According to the reports, the court stated that the particular state order that has relaxed the period of study leave from 24 months to 36 months only applies to those who are seeking study leave after the rule was implemented.
Hence, only candidates who are seeking permission for study leave on or after the date of issuance of the new rule are eligible for the extended study leave period.
Most of the petitioners are working as dental surgeons and medical officers under the Department of Health and Family Welfare. These doctors were granted study leave for preparation for their postgraduate medical courses under the old Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 2010.
According to the prevailing rules, the doctors were eligible for a 24-month study leave, which was followed by a year of extraordinary leave to complete their three-year courses.
On March 3, 2025, an order was issued by the state government according to which Rule 44 of the Leave Rules, 2010 was relaxed and changed. The new version of the rule allowed doctors to take study leave for a period of 36 months depending on special bond rules.
The petitioners approached the court to seek permission to extend their 24 months' study leave to 36 months' study leave as per the new rules.
The doctors argued that the policy could be beneficial to many of them and also alleged that the department granted a similar extension to one of the fellow doctors on June 13, 2025.
The lawsuit also targeted an April 6, 2026, departmental advisory. That notice confined the newly extended 36-month educational leave specifically to medical staff who had obtained authorization and NOCs after the March 2025 order.
According to the reports, another advocate general, YS Thakur, said that the government can change the transactions that have already taken place.
The court also stated that the extension that was granted to one doctor on June 13, 2025, was later cancelled on July 31, 2026, because it was objected to by the Finance Department.
The High Court agreed with the state government and dismissed all the lawsuits. Justice Guru said that new rules or policy relaxations only apply once they are issued and cannot be applied to past events unless explicitly stated.
The court also explained that the April 6, 2026 notice did not change the March 3, 2025 order; it just explained it.
The court found no violation of equality rights and dismissed the petitions.
(Rh/ARC)