Janardan Jha vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 857 Jhar

                                             1                    [W.P.(S) No. 80 of 2021]




               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
                                  ----

W.P.(S) No. 80 of 2021

----

Janardan Jha, aged about 71 years, son of late Anandi Jha, resident of Gandhi Raod, Near Mahavir Ashthan, Dhanbad, PO and PS Dhanbad, District Dhanbad ..... Petitioner

-- Versus --

1.The State of Jharkhand

2.The Director, Secondary Education, Govt. of Jharkhand, Telephone Bhawan, Dhurwa, PO Dhurwa, PS Jagannathpur, District Ranchi

3.The District Education Officer, Dhanbad, PO and PS Dhanbad, District Dhanbad

4.The Secretary/Headmaster, Khalsa High School, Bank More, Dhanbad, PO Dhanbad, PS Bank More, District-Dhanbad ...... Respondents

----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

---

For the Petitioner :- Mr. Navneet Toppo, Advocate For Resp.-State :- Mr.Ankur Sinha, Advocate

----

2/22.02.2021 Heard Mr. Navneet Toppo, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ankur Sinha, the learned counsel for the respondent State.

2. This writ petition has been heard through Video Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into account the situation arising due to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the parties have complained about any technical snag of audio-video and with their consent this matter has been heard.

3. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for a direction to make payment of leave encashment for unavailed leave to the petitioner.

4. The petitioner was appointed by the competent authority of Education Department on 06.08.1984 on the post of Assistant Teacher in Khalsa High School, Bank More, Dhanbad. The petitioner has been superannuated on 31.05.2010 from the post of Head Master.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner has already been superannuated and all the retiral benefits have been paid to the petitioner except the leave encashment. He submits that in view of 'Mariyam Tirkey v. State of Jharkhand and Others' case, the case of the petitioner is fully covered and the petitioner has also filed a representation before the competent authority which has not been decided as yet.

6. Mr. Sinha, the learned State submits that the petitioner may approach respondent no.3 by way of filing a fresh representation who will consider the case of the petitioner.

7. In view of the above facts and considering that the petitioner has already retired and one judgment in the case of 'Mariyam Tirkey' (supra) speaks about the leave encashment benefit of the retired employees of the aided schools, the writ petition is being disposed of directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the respondent no.3 annexing all the credentials on which the petitioner is relying for such relief including a copy of the aforesaid judgment rendered in case of 'Mariyam Tirkey' (supra) within three weeks.

8. If such a representation is filed within the aforesaid period, the respondent no.3 shall take a final call on the representation of the petitioner within eight weeks thereafter and will pass a reasoned order.

9. It is needless to say that if any decision is taken in favour of the petitioner, the benefit of the same shall be provided to the petitioner within six weeks further thereafter.

10. With the above observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.

( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J) SI/