Tightening a Leave Circular Before Issue
The personnel department has drafted a circular on earned leave and three sentences are drawing complaints. (a) 'Employees who have not availed leave may apply before 31 March or their leave will lapse.' (b) 'The competent authority may reject any application without assigning reasons, if deemed necessary.' (c) 'It is hereby informed that the records pertaining to leave of all employees are being verified by the section and employees are requested to kindly cooperate in the matter.' The union has objected to (b). The section head insists (a) is 'clear enough as it stands'. The circular will be signed by the General Manager, who wants wording that will survive an appeal or a grievance hearing.
1. Which sentence carries the greatest legal exposure, and what exactly is wrong with it? Deal with (b) first, then assess the section head's claim about (a).
Read the worked answer
(b) is the serious defect. It combines three problems: unfettered discretion ('may'), no reasons, and a vague trigger ('if deemed necessary'). An administrative power that can be exercised without recorded reasons is vulnerable on precisely the ground that it is arbitrary - a grievance or appellate authority will ask what material the competent authority considered and will find nothing on record. The clause also fails its own purpose: it gives the employee no notice of what conduct attracts rejection, so it cannot guide behaviour.
(a) is not 'clear enough'. Two readings are open: (i) the leave balance lapses on 31 March, or (ii) the right to apply lapses. It also leaves unclear whether leave already sanctioned but not availed is protected, and whether lapse is automatic or requires an order. A sentence that can be read two ways in a document governing entitlements will be read against the drafter.
(c) is not a legal defect - it is wordy and impersonal, and 'kindly cooperate' is a request where the section actually needs a duty to produce records.
2. Rewrite (b) and (c) in plain official English, each in 25 words or fewer, so that the discretion is bounded and the duty is clear.
Read the worked answer
(b) Rewrite (24 words): 'The competent authority shall record in writing the reasons for rejecting an application, and shall communicate them to the employee within fifteen days.'
Why this works: 'shall' converts discretion into a duty to act in a defined way; 'record in writing' creates the appeal record the General Manager needs; the time limit makes the duty enforceable.
(c) Rewrite (19 words): 'The section is verifying the leave records of all employees. Employees shall produce any record asked for within seven days.'
Why this works: active voice names the actor; the request for cooperation becomes a specified obligation with a deadline; the padding ('hereby informed', 'pertaining to', 'kindly') is gone without losing the instruction.
3. The drafting clerk asks when to use 'shall' and when 'may' in this circular. Give the rule and one example of each drawn from the rewritten text.
Read the worked answer
Rule: use 'shall' where the circular imposes an obligation or confers a duty that the office must be able to prove it performed; use 'may' only where a genuine choice is intended and the criteria for that choice are stated elsewhere in the same document.
- 'Shall': 'The competent authority shall record in writing the reasons for rejecting an application.' Here the office must be able to show a record; 'may' would let it reject silently, which is what the union is objecting to.
- 'May': 'An employee may apply for leave at any time before 31 March' - this confers a choice on the employee and the cut-off is separately stated, so 'may' is safe.
The clerk's practical test: if a rejected employee asks 'show me where you were required to do that', the answer should exist in the text. If it does not, the verb is wrong.