Jharkhand High Court
Brother Edmon Toppo vs State Of Jharkhand on 26 August, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S) No. 3264 of 2020
Brother Edmon Toppo ..... Petitioner
Vs.
1. State of Jharkhand
2. Director Human Resource Department, Project Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi
3. District Education Officer, Gumla .... Respondents
With
W.P.(S) No. 3273 of 2020
Patrick Kerketta ..... Petitioner
Vs.
4. State of Jharkhand
5. Director Human Resource Department, Project Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi
6. District Education Officer, Ranchi .... Respondents
With
W.P.(S) No. 279 of 2021
Silvester Beck ..... Petitioner
Vs.
7. State of Jharkhand
8. Director Human Resource Department, Project Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi
9. District Education Officer, Ranchi .... Respondents
----------
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DR. S.N.PATHAK
(Through: Video Conferencing)
For the Petitioners : Mr. P.A. Khan, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Anshuman Kr., AC to Sr. SC-II {WP(S) No.3264 of 2020}
For the Respondents : Mr. M.L. Yadav, SC (L & C)-III {W.P.(S) No.3273/2020}
For the Respondents : Mr. Sharabil Ahmad, AC to SC(Mines-I) {W.P.(S) No.279/2021}
-----------
05/ 26.08.2021 Since the common issues are involved in these writ petitions, they are tagged
together and are being disposed of by this common order.
The petitioners have approached this Court with a prayer for a direction upon
the respondents to pay the amount of Leave Encashment to them.
The case of the petitioners lies in a narrow compass. The petitioner in W.P(S)
No.3264/2020 was appointed as Asst. Teacher on 17.06.1968 and after completing the
satisfactory services, superannuated from the services on 31.05.2002. After retirement,
though the petitioner received the entire retiral benefits but the benefits of leave
encashment has not been extended to the petitioner. The petitioner represented before
the respondent-authorities on 17.07.2019 for payment of the leave encashment but the
respondents have not paid any heed to the same.
The petitioner in W.P(S) No.3273/2020 was appointed as Asst. Teacher on
01.09.1982 and after completing the satisfactory services, superannuated from the
services on 31.05.2006. After retirement, though the petitioner received the entire
retiral benefits but the benefits of leave encashment has not been extended to the
petitioner. The petitioner represented before the respondent-authorities on 17.05.2019
for payment of the leave encashment but the respondents have not paid any heed to the
same.
Similarly, the petitioner in W.P(S) No.279/2021 was appointed as Asst.
Teacher on 30.05.1977 and after completing the satisfactory services, superannuated
from the services on 30.11.2008. After retirement, though the petitioner received the
entire retiral benefits but the benefits of leave encashment has not been extended to the
petitioner. The petitioner represented before the respondent-authorities on 17.07.2020
for payment of the leave encashment but the respondents have not paid any heed to the
same.
Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners have approached this Court for
redressal of their grievances.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the issue
involved in these cases is no more res-integra in view of the judgment passed in case of
Mariam Tirkey & others Vrs. the State of Jharkhand & others, reported in 2014 (1)
JLJR 465, which has been affirmed upto the Hon'ble Apex Court. In view of the ratio
laid down in aforesaid case, the respondents cannot be permitted to stop/ withhold the
benefit of leave encashment payable to the petitioners.
Learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondents vehemently
oppose the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners and jointly submit that
in view of Resolution of the State Government dated 05.03.2019, the petitioners are not
entitled for the benefit of leave encashment. However, they concede on the point that the
issue has already been decided by this Hon'ble Court, which has been affirmed upto the
Hon'ble Apex Court.
Be that as it may, having gone through the rival submission of the
parties and taking into consideration the fact that the issue is now no more res-integra
in view of the judgment passed in case of Mariam Tirkey & others Vrs. the State of
Jharkhand & others, reported in 2014 (1) JLJR 465, which has been affirmed upto
the Hon'ble Apex Court, these writ petitions are disposed of with a direction upon the
respondents to extend the benefits of leave encashment to the petitioners, within a
period of six weeks from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order.
(Dr. S.N. Pathak, J.)
Punit/-
