Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 17138 MP
Judgement Date : 13 October, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
ON THE 13 th OF OCTOBER, 2023
WRIT PETITION No. 26523 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
RAGHURAJ SINGH PARMAR S/O SHRI MOHAR MAN
SINGH, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, OCCUPATION: RETD.
DRIVER PUBLIC WORK DEPARTMENT DIVISION
MORENA R/O GOPALPURA MORENA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI ALOK BANDHU SHRIVASTAVA- ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY PUBLIC WORKS
DEPARTMENT, MANTRALAYA, VALLABH
BHAWAN, DISTRICT BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. ENGINEER IN CHIEF, PUBLIC WORKS
DEPARTMENT BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. CHIEF ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS
DEPARTMENT MORENA (MADHYA PRADESH)
5. DISTRICT PENSION OFFICER, DISTRICT PENSION
OFFICE, MORENA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI S.S.KUSHWAH- GOVT. ADVOCATE)
This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the Signature Not Verified following:
Signed by: MADHU SOODAN PRASAD Signing time: 13-10-2023 05:57:38 PM ORDER
This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by the inaction/order of the respondents, whereby the claim of petitioner for encahsment of the earned leave has been rejected on the ground that he is a retired work charged employee and not entitled to leave encahsment.
Petitioner has placed reliance on the decision rendered in W.A. No.470/2012 (The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Ram Khilawan Singh), preferred by the State of M.P. against the order dated 29.06.2011 passed in W.P. No.9930/2011.
Petitioner has also relied on Rule 4 of M.P. Work Charged and
Contingency Paid Employees Leave Rules, 1977 (in short '1977 Rules'). The Division Bench in the case of Ram Khilawan Singh (supra) has considered the identical issue raised therein, wherein the single Judge has allowed the petition preferred by a contingency paid employee and held him entitled for leave encahsment of 240 days. This order was modified by the Division Bench in view of the admission of the State Government and Rule 4 of 1977 Rules which provides that an employee working under the work charged establishment is entitled for the benefit of encahsment of 120 days earned leave.
Per contra, the petition is vehemently opposed by the counsel for the State.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
In view of the fact that the issue in the present case is identical to the case of Ram Khilawan Singh (supra) and the said judgment is squarely applicable to the present case also, this petition is allowed. The respondents are directed Signature Not Verified Signed by: MADHU SOODAN PRASAD to extend the benefit of encashment of 120 days of earned leave to the petitioner Signing time: 13-10-2023 05:57:38 PM as admissible under 1977 Rules within a period of 90 days from the date of
production of certified copy of the order passed today.
With the aforesaid, this petition is disposed of. Certified copy as per rules.
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE) JUDGE ms/-
Signature Not Verified Signed by: MADHU SOODAN PRASAD Signing time: 13-10-2023 05:57:38 PM
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!