Kerala High Court: In a petition filed by the petitioner, suffering from aggressive form of blood cancer, seeking to direct the grant special leave of 47 days and corresponding extension of her training period to enable the completion of her super specialty course, a Single Judge Bench of Bechu Kurian Thomas J., noted that the present case was unique in circumstances, as the petitioner’s maternity leave and her medical leave both had to be availed in the same year. The general principle of availing leave beyond one year would result in termination of the candidature, which cannot be applied to such rare instances.
The Court stated that maternity leave being a right and other leaves being a discretion, the maternity leave availed by the petitioner cannot be clubbed with the other regular leaves that can be availed by such a trainee. Thus, the Court stated that the petitioner ought to be permitted to submit a fresh application in a time-bound manner, and the respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders, considering the peculiar circumstances.
Background
The petitioner completed her MBBS and MD in General Medicine and later qualified the NEET Super Specialty Examination (NEET-SS) in 2022. She joined the DrNB course in Nephrology, Super Specialty course on 14-12-2022 at the respondent 4 Institution. During her training period, she availed 184 days of maternity leave, along with 23 additional leave days, with a total of 207 days in the 2023. Later, in 2025, she was diagnosed with Stage IV High Grade B-Cell Lymphoma, an aggressive form of blood cancer. She began chemotherapy on 28-08-2025, and her treatment and rest were required to be continued February 2026. She applied for medical leave of 195 days, i.e. from 18-08-2025 to 28-02-2026.
According to the petitioner, she would be able to resume her training from 1-3-2026, but by then, the total leave availed by her would exceed the permitted leave by 37 days. The petitioner submitted the leave application, to which she was informed that the total leave availed by her would be 402 days and as per Clause 7(c) of the Comprehensive Leave Rules for NBEMS trainees, if the total leave availed during the training programme is more than a year, it shall lead to the cancellation of the candidature of the trainee. Thus, the petitioner was directed to re-submit the leave application within permissible limits.
Thus, the petitioner filed the present petition seeking directions to grant special leave of 47 days and corresponding extension of her training period to enable the completion of her super specialty course. The petitioner also seeks a declaration that Clause 7(c) of the Comprehensive Leave Rules will not apply to her since she was admitted to the super specialty course on 14-12-2022 when different Rules were in force.
Analysis, Law, and Decision
The Court stated that when the petitioner joined the course, as per the relevant rules which were in force provided that under normal circumstances leave of one year should not be carried forward to the next year, but in exceptional cases such as prolonged illness, the leave across DrNB training may be clubbed together with prior approval of the NBEMS. However, the present rules do not take into consideration exceptional cases.
The Court stated that undisputedly, the petitioner is suffering from lymphoma, which she contracted while undergoing the course. The reason for seeking leave beyond the period of one year is not attributable to any willful conduct but as something beyond her control. These circumstances cannot be ignored by the respondent, as the serious illness contracted by her was not her mistake.
The Court stated that the reproductive rights of a woman have been recognized as a part of fundamental rights and maternity leave must be regarded as an aspect of reproductive right. Thus, the woman’s right to avail maternity leave cannot be denied. The Court stated that maternity leave being a right and other leaves being a discretion, the maternity leave availed by the petitioner cannot be clubbed with the other regular leaves that can be availed by such a trainee.
The Court stated that normally in academic matters, it would abide by the decision of academic bodies. However, extraordinary situations require an extraordinary approach, and the present case is unique in nature. The Court noted that the petitioners’ maternity leave and her medical leave both had to be availed in the same year. The general principle that a person availing a leave beyond one year would result in termination of the candidature, cannot be applied to such rare instances. Therefore, the Court stated that the restriction in the Comprehensive Leave Rules for NBEMS trainees 2024 ought not be applied pedantically to the petitioner.
The Court further stated that the petitioner ought to be permitted to submit a fresh application in a time-bound manner, and the respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders, considering the peculiar circumstances. Therefore, the petitioner shall not be terminated from the DrNB programme and accordingly, disposed of the present petition.
[Susan K. John v. National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences, 2026 SCC OnLine Ker 1333, decided on 20-1-2026]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: George Jacob, Roshan Jacob Mundackal.
For the Respondents: T.Sanjay , SC, National Board of Examination in Medical Sciences,
O.M.Shalina, Deputy Solicitor General of India , M.Gopikrishanan Nambiar, Karthik S. Acharya, K.John Mathai, Joson Manavalan , Kuryan Thomas , Paulose C. Abraham, Raja Kannan, Pranoy Harilal.