Nivrutti Yadav Khadse And Ors vs State Of Mah And Ors
2016 Latest Caselaw 6343 Bom

                                                                   46-wp5555-07.odt
                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                             BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                             WRIT PETITION NO. 5555 OF 2007




                                                                          
    1.      Nivrutti s/o Yadav Khadse,
            Age 69 years, Occu: Pensioner,




                                                  
            R/o 17, Nutan Varsha Colony, 
            Jalgaon, Dist.  Jalgaon.

    2.      Shantaram Laxman  Patil




                                                 
            Age 67 years, Occu: Pensioner
            R/o 2B, Navprabhat Society,
            Behind District Industries 
            Centre, Jalgaon.




                                         
    3.      Narayan Punjo Patil   
            Age 68 years, Occu: Pensioner
            R/o Near Water Tank, Faizpur,
            Tq. Yawal, Dist. Jalgaon
                                 
    4.      Onkar Natthu Narkhede          ...  Petitioners
            Age 77 years, Occu: Pensioner,
            R/o 144, Mohannagar, Jalgaon,
      

            Dist. Jalgaon.

            VERSUS
   



    1.      The State of Maharashtra,
            Through its Secretary, 
            Education Department, 





            Mantralaya, Mumbai 32.

    2.      The Joint Director of 
            Education,
            Jalgaon, Dist. Jalgaon.





    3.      The Registrar, North 
            Maharashtra University, 
            Jalgaon, Dist. Jalgaon. 

    4.      The President,
            Tapi Parisar Vidya Mandal,
            Jalgaon at Jalgaon.

    5.      The Principal,                         ...  Respondents.

                                                                                       1/4

         ::: Uploaded on - 27/10/2016             ::: Downloaded on - 28/10/2016 00:49:06 :::
                                                                        46-wp5555-07.odt
            Tapi Parisar Vidya Mandal's 
            Dhanaji Nana Mahavidyalaya, 
            Faizpur, Dist. Jalgaon




                                                                              
    Mr. Vijay Y. Patil,  h/for Mr.A.T. Telhar, Advocate for 
    the petitioner,
    Mr. M. B. Bharaswadkar, AGP for respondents 1&2-State.




                                                      
    Mr.   Y.B.   Bolkar,   Advocate   h/for   Mr.   A.B.Girase, 
    Advocate for respondent No.3,
    Mrs.   Chaitaliu   Kutti,   Advocate   h/for   Mr.   P.  N.   Kutti, 
    Advocate for  respondents 4 and 5.




                                                     
                                        CORAM   :  S. V. GANGAPURWALA & 
                                                    K. L. WADANE, JJ.




                                               
                                         DATE   :   25th October,  2016


    JUDGMENT:  

ig

1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With

consent of parties, the petition is taken up for final

disposal

3. Mr. Patil, the learned counsel for the

petitioner submits that the petitioners are retired

employees of respondent No.5. Amount of leave

encashment is not paid to the petitioners. The

management is required to pay the said amount. The

learned counsel relies on the judgment of the Division

Bench of this Court dated 20 th August, 2014 in Writ

Petition No. 625 of 2014 with connected matters. The

learned counsel further submits that even the

46-wp5555-07.odt Grievance Committee also recommended the claim of the

petitioners.

4. Mrs. Kutti, the learned counsel for respondents

4 and 5 submits that the petition is bad on account of

delay and latches. The learned counsel submits that

the recommendation of the Grievance committee is not

binding. The Grievance Committee did not hear the

respondents 4 and 5 Management. The Management has

not taken any decision on the same. The petition does

not disclose for how many days, the petitioners

actually worked and how much leave was surrendered. In

absence of any pleadings, the relief claimed by the

petitioners cannot be granted. Statute 424(C) cannot

be expected to confer dual benefit.

5. Mr.Bolkar, the learned counsel for respondent

University states that the University has rightly

recommended the grant of benefit of leave encashment

to the petitioners.

6. We heard learned AGP also.

7. The issue that the employees, at the relevant

time, were entitled for the benefits of leave

encashment and it is only the management which is

46-wp5555-07.odt responsible to pay the same is no longer res integra.

The same has been held by the Apex Court in case of

State of Maharashtra & others Vs. Nowrosjee Wadia

College and others in Civil Appeal Nos. 531-532 of

2013. We have also held so in Writ petition No. 625 of

2014 with connected writ petitions under order dated

20th August, 2014.

8. In light of above, we pass the following order.

ig O R D E R I. The Respondent Nos.4 and 5 shall determine the amount payable to the Petitioners with

regard to the benefit of Encashment of Unutilized Earned Leave, expeditiously and preferably within a period of three (3) months

from today.

II. Upon determination of the amount, the Respondent Nos.4 and 5 shall pay the said amount

to the Petitioners within a period of six (6) months thereafter alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per annum simple interest from the date of their entitlement till the payment.

9. Rule is made absolute accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.

(K. L. WADANE, J.) (S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ) JPC