Kerala High Court
Jay Kant Prasad vs Fertilizers And Chemicals ... on 25 March, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 4TH CHAITHRA, 1943
WP(C).No.5598 OF 2021(Y)
PETITIONER:
JAY KANT PRASAD
AGED 35 YEARS
S/O.SANICHAR SAW, NOW RESIDING AT R.C.GREENPARK
APARTMENTS, DAHILA D2, 1 MILK COLONY ROAD,
MADHAVARAM, CHENNAI, TAMILNADU-600051.
BY ADVS.
SRI.RAJESH NAIR
SRI.K.BALACHANDRAN (MANGALATH)
SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN
SHRI.NIKHIL VISWAM
RESPONDENTS:
1 FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS TRAVANCORE LTD.,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR
CORPORATE OFFICE, UDYOGAMANDAL, PIN-683501.
2 THE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR,
FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS TRAVANCORE LTD., CORPORATE
OFFICE, UDYOGAMANDAL, PIN-683501, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
KERALA STATE.
3 THE GENERAL MANAGER(HR),
FACT LTD., UDYOGAMANDAL, PIN-683501, ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT, KERALA STATE.
R1-3 BY ADV. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR
R1-3 BY ADV. SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI
R1-3 BY ADV. SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN
R1-3 BY ADV. SRI.KURYAN THOMAS
R1-3 BY ADV. SRI.PAULOSE C. ABRAHAM
R1-3 BY ADV. SRI.RAJA KANNAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.5598 OF 2021(Y)
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 25th day of March, 2021
This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:-
"Issue a writ of mandamus or such other appropriate writ,
direction or order directing the respondents to pay the
petitioner his eligible balance leave encashment along with
interest @ 18% expeditiously, at any rate within a time
limit as fixed by this Honourable Court."
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
3. It is submitted that the petitioner was employee of
the 1st respondent Company, who had been relieved from
service on resignation for taking up employment in other
public sector undertaking. It is submitted that the 1 st
respondent had issued no objection to the petitioner for
participating in the selection to the latter public sector
undertaking as well. It is submitted by the learned counsel
for the petitioner that the salary certificate would show that
the petitioner had paid leave to his credit, which was liable
WP(C).No.5598 OF 2021(Y)
to be encashed on the basis of the leave rules in force. It is
stated that in similar cases, the respondents had refused to
grant the benefits of encashment of paid leave and the issue
had been considered by this Court in a common judgment in
W.P.(C) Nos.31700/2014 and 33684/2015. With regard to the
claim for leave encashment, this Court had held that the
freezing of such encashment in 1997 would not survive after
the pay revision orders w.e.f 01.01.2007 and that the
benefits are liable to be granted to persons, who are relieved
from service irrespective of the fact that they have
submitted their resignation.
4. A counter affidavit has been placed on record by
the respondents. It is submitted that the claim of the
petitioner for enchasment of paid leave cannot be accepted
in view of the fact that there was a freezing of the scheme of
leave encashment w.e.f 12.07.2001 except as a terminal
benefit in case of retirement and death. It is further stated
that 2010 pay revision order does not repeal or render the
previous pay revision orders null and void and that the
WP(C).No.5598 OF 2021(Y)
freezing continues. It is further contended that the
petitioner, who had resigned from service is not eligible for
grant of the leave encashment benefits.
5. Having considered the contentions advanced, I
find that the specific issue as to the entitlement of
encashment of leave on resignation has been considered by
this Court in the judgments, which are produced along with
this writ petition. It was held that the 2010 pay revision
order made it clear that persons, who resigned from service
of the 1st respondent Company after the date of effect of the
pay revision, would be entitled to leave encashment as per
the leave rules in force in the Company. The said judgment
has been upheld in appeal as also in SLP.
6. In the above view of the matter, I am of the
opinion that the contentions raised in the counter affidavit
cannot be accepted. The petitioner would be entitled to
encashment of paid leave according to his entitlement as
per the leave rules. There will be a direction to the
WP(C).No.5598 OF 2021(Y)
respondents to disburse the benefits of encashment of paid
leave according to his eligibility in the leave rules within a
period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of
this judgment.
This writ petition is ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
ANU SIVARAMAN
JUDGE
Bng/25.03.2021
WP(C).No.5598 OF 2021(Y)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF CERTIFICATE DATED 04.01.2018
ISSUED BY THE SENIOR. MNGR.(H.R), FACT
LTD.
EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF RELIEVING ORDER DATED
06.03.2018 OF THE SENIOR. MNGR.(H.R),
FACT LTD.
EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF SALARY STATEMENT OF PETITIONER
FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY, 2018.
EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF LETTER DATED 11.01.2021 OF THE
PTR.TO THE RESP.COMPANY.
EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF ORDER NO.106/8/2000-HR-1 DATED
11.07.2001.
EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF MANAGERIAL PAY REVISION ORDER
DATED 28.08.2001.
EXHIBIT P7 COPY OF MANAGERIAL PAY REVISION ORDER
DATED 14.08.2010.
EXHIBIT P8 COPY OF THE JUDGT. DATED 11.01.2017 IN
WP(C) 31700/14.
EXHIBIT P9 COPY OF THE JUDGT. DATED 27.02.2018 IN
W.A.NO.507/17.
EXHIBIT P10 COPY OF THE JUDGT. DATED 30.10.2018 IN
W.A.NO.1554/2018.
EXHIBIT P11 COPY OF THE JUDGT. DATED 08.11.2018 IN
WP(C)NO.23318/2018.
EXHIBIT P12 COPY OF THE JUDGT. DATED 23.10.2019 IN
WP(C)NO.24734/2019.
