Gujarat High Court
Mathai Mampallil Thomas (M T Mathai) vs Chairman And Managing Director on 28 April, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/11238/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/04/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11238 of 2015
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J. SHELAT
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✓
==========================================================
MATHAI MAMPALLIL THOMAS (M T MATHAI)
Versus
CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS TITHI THAKKAR for MR DM THAKKAR(894) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR DG SHUKLA(1998) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J. SHELAT
Date : 28/04/2026
JUDGMENT
1. Heard Ms. Tithi Thakkar, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of Mr. D. M. Thakkar, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. D. G. Shukla, learned Advocate for the respondent.
2. The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs: Page 1 of 7 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Tue Apr 28 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 29 02:31:52 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/11238/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/04/2026 undefined "a) The Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writs or orders and may further be pleased to -
b) Set aside the action of the Respondent in withholding the amount of encashment of Earned Leave, to which the petitioner is entitled to on the date of his superannuation, with effect from 31.12.2009,
c) Declare that the petitioner is entitled to be paid amount of Rs.2,82,470/- (towards encashment of Earned Leave of 282 days with interest @ 18 per cent, from the date of superannuation till the date of actual payment),
d) Direct the Respondent to release the amount of Rs.2,82,470/- (towards encashment of Earned Leave of 282 days with interest @ 18 per cent from the date of superannuation till the date of actual payment
e) Declare that the Respondent will be entitled for difference in Leave encashment of 282 days, upon payment of revision of salary as per Sixth Pay Commission recommendations.
f) Pending admission and final hearing, by way of an interim direction direct Respondent to forthwith release the amount of Rs.2,82,470/- due to the petitioner towards encashment of leae,
g) Pass such other and further orders as may be deemed proper in the in the facts and circumstances of the case." SHORT FACTS:
3. The petitioner was serving with the respondent, namely National Textile Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "the Corporation") and retired from service as Assistant Page 2 of 7 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Tue Apr 28 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 29 02:31:52 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/11238/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/04/2026 undefined Manager (Administration) on 31.12.2009. Since the petitioner was facing criminal prosecution as CBI case No. RC 2/1988 was pending against him at the time of retirement, the Corporation has withheld the amount of gratuity and leave encashment payable to the petitioner. It is informed to this Court that, so far as the amount of gratuity is concerned, the same was deposited with the Controlling Authority and received by the petitioner. Nonetheless, the amount of leave encashment is till date not received by the petitioner. The petitioner appears to have been acquitted from the aforesaid criminal case vide the judgment and order dated 13.11.2018 passed by the Special Court (CBI) Court No.1, Ahmedabad. SUBMISSIONS OF THE PETITIONER:
4. Ms. Thakkar, learned Advocate, would submit that the Corporation cannot withhold the amount of leave encashment on the pretext that the petitioner was facing a criminal case. It is submitted that there is no power available under the Conduct, Disciplinary and Appeal Rules, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as "Rules, 2009"), whereby, the respondent can withhold the amount. It is submitted that due to non-receipt of the leave encashment from the respondent for a quite long Page 3 of 7 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Tue Apr 28 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 29 02:31:52 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/11238/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/04/2026 undefined time, the petitioner is entitled to receive interest on such amount.
5. Making the above submissions, Ms. Thakkar, learned Advocate, would request this Court to allow the present writ petition.
SUBMISSIONS OF THE RESPONDENT:
6. Per contra, Mr. Shukla, learned Advocate for the Corporation, would only submit that the reason of non-payment of the amount of leave encashment was due to the pendency of the CBI case against the petitioner and at the relevant point of time, while passing the office order dated 31.12.2009, the competent authority of the Corporation, upon referring the Rules 2009, decided to withhold the said amount. 6.1. Mr. Shukla, learned Advocate, would further submit that as it is informed to this Court that the petitioner is already acquitted from the said criminal case, the necessary steps will be taken by the Corporation to make the payment of leave encashment to the petitioner and considering the fact that the Corporation is a sick unit, this Court may not award any interest. 6.2. Making the above submissions, Mr. Shukla, learned Advocate, Page 4 of 7 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Tue Apr 28 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 29 02:31:52 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/11238/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/04/2026 undefined would request this Court to reject the present writ petition.
7. No other and further submissions are being made.
ANALYSIS:
8. Having heard the learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties and upon perusal of the petition and the documents made available on record, prima facie, it appears that the petitioner was facing the aforesaid criminal case when he retired from the service of the Corporation on 31.12.2009. At that time, the petitioner was not paid the amount of gratuity, leave salary, etc., by the Corporation due to the said pendency of the criminal case. The competent authority of the Corporation vide its office order dated 31.12.2009 referred the Rules 2009 for not granting the said benefit upon retirement of the petitioner.
9. This Court has called upon Mr. Shukla, learned Advocate for the respondent, to show any rules or provisions under Rules, 2009 which entitle the Corporation to withhold the retiral dues of the petitioner. Mr. Shukla, learned Advocate, was unable to lay his hand on such a rule and candidly submitted that due to the reason of pendency of the criminal case, the competent Page 5 of 7 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Tue Apr 28 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 29 02:31:52 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/11238/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/04/2026 undefined authority of the Corporation decided to withhold the said amount.
10. Once, it is undisputed that there are no specific rules or any provisions under Rules, 2009, which entitle the Corporation to withhold the amount of retiral dues of the petitioner, merely because the criminal case was pending against the petitioner at the time of retirement, the impugned action of the Corporation withholding such amount is nothing but an arbitrary action on the part of the Corporation and the same is required to be interfered with by this Court. It is by now well-settled position of law that if the employer, being the State, withholds the amount / retiral dues of the employee without any justifiable reason and without any authority of law, such employer is required to pay interest on such amount for delayed payment. [See: D. D. Tewari (D) Thr. Lrs V/s. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd., reported in (2014) 8 SCC 894.]
11. Since the impugned action of the Corporation is found to be arbitrary and without any authority, merely because the Corporation is sick by now, it would not be a ground not to award any interest, because of the fact that the petitioner is Page 6 of 7 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Tue Apr 28 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 29 02:31:52 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/11238/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/04/2026 undefined deprived from enjoyment of the money, which is wrongfully withheld by the Corporation and enjoyed it for its business or any other purpose.
12. In light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and having found the action of the Corporation to be arbitrary, I am of the considered view that the petitioner is entitled to receive the amount / benefit of leave encashment with 7.5% p.a. interest from 01.02.2010 till its payment.
13. The Corporation is hereby directed to pay the aforesaid payment to the petitioner on or before 31.07.2026, failing which, the petitioner shall be entitled to receive such amount with 9% p.a. interest from 01.08.2026 till its realization.
14. It is also open for the petitioner to initiate contempt proceedings against the erring officials of the Corporation in the case of non-compliance of the aforesaid direction.
15. In view of the foregoing reasons, the present writ petition is partly allowed. Rule is made absolute, to the aforesaid extent. There shall be no order as to costs. Direct service is permitted.
(MAULIK J. SHELAT, J) NILESH Page 7 of 7 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Tue Apr 28 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 29 02:31:52 IST 2026