Madras High Court
S.Ahammed Sulaiman vs The District Collector on 29 April, 2021
W.P.(MD) No.7920 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 29.04.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI
W.P.(MD) No.7920 of 2021
and
W.M.P(MD)No.6044 of 2021
S.Ahammed Sulaiman ... Petitioner
-Vs-
1.The District Collector,
Tiruchirappalli District,
Trichy.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Trichy.
3.The Tahsildar,
Thiruverumbur Taluk,
Trichy District. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the
records relating to the impugned proceedings of the second respondent
in his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.A3/7899/2007, dated 26.08.2019 and
quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the second
respondent to disburse the leave salary as well as special provident fund
amount to the petitioner within a time frame as stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sarvagan Prabhu
1/23
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) No.7920 of 2021
For Respondents : Mr.C.Ramesh
Special Government Pleader
ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed to call for the records relating to the
impugned proceedings of the second respondent in his proceedings in
Na.Ka.No.A3/7899/2007, dated 26.08.2019 and quash the same as
illegal and consequently direct the second respondent to disburse the
leave salary as well as Special Provident Fund amount to the petitioner
within a time frame as stipulated by this Court.
2. Mr.C.Ramesh, learned Special Government Pleader takes
notice on belalf of the respondents. By consent of both parties, this Writ
Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.
3. The petitioner was appointed as Village Administrative
Officer by direct recruitment, in the year 1994. He was transferred to
various places as Village Administrative Officer in Trichirappalli
District. While he was working as Village Administrative Officer at
Navalpattu Village in charge of Gundur Village, Trichy Taluk, on
02.11.2007, a case in Cr.No.20 of 2007 was registered, for the offence
under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act 1988, by the Vigilance
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) No.7920 of 2021
and Anti Corruption Wing, Trichy. The petitioner was suspended from
service on 02.11.2007 by the third respondent. The petitioner
challenging the said order of suspension, filed a writ petition in
W.P(MD)No.12082 of 2009. This Court, by order dated 23.11.2009,
granted an order of interim stay. In view of the interim order granted
by this Court, the second respondent by the proceedings in
Na.Ka.A3/7899/07, dated 26.03.2010, revoked the order of suspension
and posted the petitioner at Theneripatti Village, Thiruverumbur Taluk,
Trichy District. Subsequently, the petitioner attained the age of
superannuation on 30.06.2010. The second respondent vide his
proceedings in RC.No.A3/7899/2007, dated 30.06.2010, suspended the
petitioner and did not allow him to retire from service on the ground
that Criminal Case in Cr.No.20 of 2007 registered against him is
pending.
4. According to the petitioner, in his service records, he
maintained earned leave for 240 days and unearned leave for 150 days
and also Special Provident Fund 1 & 2 and hence, he is entitled to get
more than Rs.4,00,000/-. Therefore, the petitioner has made
representation, dated 23.05.2016 to the second respondent seeking to
settle the Earned Leave and Unearned Leave and Special Provident
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) No.7920 of 2021
Fund. The second respondent, by his Communication in
Na.Ka.No.A3/7899/2007, dated 21.06.2016, directed the third
respondent to settle the above benefits to the petitioner. The third
respondent has not settled the amount. The petitioner filed a writ
petition in W.P(MD)No.2058 of 2016 for a direction to the third
respondent to settle the amount as per the proceedings of the second
respondent. This Court, by order, 11.03.2019, directed the second
respondent therein to pass orders on the representation of the
petitioner. The second respondent by the impugned proceedings, dated
26.08.2019, rejected the claim of the petitioner. Challenging the same,
the petitioner has come out with the present writ petition.
5. In support of his contention, the learned counsel for the
petitioner relied on the Judgment of the Division Bench of this Court,
dated 31.07.2019 in W.A(MD)No.105 of 2019 (The Secretary to
Government and two others vs. K.Palaniyandi).
6. The respondents filed counter affidavit. The learned Special
Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that the
petitioner attained the age of superannuation 30.06.2010 and he was
not permitted to retire from service. As per Rule 7 of Tamil Nadu Leave
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) No.7920 of 2021
Rules, 1933, a person, who is placed under suspension and not
permitted to retire from service on the date of superannuation, is not
entitled for encashment of earned leave, unearned leave and Special
Provident Fund. The petitioner was retained in service under Rule 56(1)
(c) of the Fundamental Rules and hence he is not entitled to the relief
sought for in the writ petition and prayed for dismissal of the writ
petition.
7. Heard Mr.S.Sarvagan Prabhu, learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner and Mr.C.Ramesh, learned Special Government Pleader
appearing for the respondents.
8. From the materials on record, it is seen that the petitioner
was suspended from service on the date of superannuation and he was
not permitted to retire from service, as the criminal case is pending.
The petitioner has given representation to the second respondent
seeking encashment of earned leave, unearned leave and Special
Provident Fund. The second respondent rejected the same on the
ground that as per Rule 7 of Tamil Nadu Leave Rules, 1933 the
petitioner was not permitted to retire on the date of superannuation due
to pendency of the criminal case. This issue of payment of earned leave,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) No.7920 of 2021
unearned leave and Special Provident Fund is no longer res integra.
The Division Bench of this Court, by judgment dated 31.07.2019 in
W.A(MD)No.105 of 2019, considered this issue and held that an
employee, who was not allowed to retire and even an employee
dismissed from service is entitled to encashment of leave salary as well
as the amount lying to his/her credit in Provident Fund and Special
Provident Fund. The Division Bench of this Court has further held that
the said amounts are accrued interest and are properties of the
employee. The relevant portion of the judgment is extracted
hereunder:-
“9.The point for consideration is as to
whether the Writ Court is justified in granting the
relief to the writ petitioner in respect of his claim
over the Encashment of Leave Salary and Special
Provident Fund.
10.There is no dispute to the fact that the
writ petitioner on the date of his superannuation,
was placed under suspension and consequently,
was not permitted to retire. The said exercise
was made against the writ petitioner by invoking
the Rule 56(1)(c) of the Fundamental Rules. The
said Rule and Instruction stated therein read as
follows:-
“(c) Notwithstanding anything
contained in clause (a), a Government
servant who is under suspension,
(i) on a charge of misconduct; or
(ii) against whom an enquiry into
grave charges of criminal misconduct
or allegations of criminal misconduct,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) No.7920 of 2021
is pending; or
(iii) against whom an enquiry
into grave charges is contemplated or
is pending; or
(iv) against whom a complaint of
criminal offence is under investigation
or trial.
shall not be permitted by the
*appointing authority to retire on his
reaching the date of retirement, but
shall be retained in service until the
enquiry into the charge of misconduct
or criminal misconduct or the enquiry
into allegations of criminal misconduct
or the enquiry into contemplated
charges or disciplinary proceeding
taken under rule 17(c) of the Tamil
Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and
Appeal) Rules or rule 3(c) of the Tamil
Nadu Police Sub-ordinate service
(Discipline and Appeal) Rules, as the
case may be, in respect of item (iv)
above is concluded and a final order
passed thereon by the competent
authority or by any higher authority.
Explanation.—For the purpose of
this clause, the expression ‘criminal
misconduct’ shall have the same
meaning as in Section 13 of the
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
(Central Act 49 of 1988).
Instruction under Rule 56 (1) (c).
—Whether a Government servant
referred to in clause (c) is fully
exonerated or not, he shall be
considered to have been on extension
of service for the period from the date
of retirement to the date of
termination of the proceedings. During
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) No.7920 of 2021
such an extension of service, the
service rights which have accrued to
the Government servant shall freeze at
the level reached on the date of
retirement and the salary during that
period shall not exceed the pension
which has accrued to the Government
servant on that date.”
11.Perusal of the said instruction would
show that a Government Servant referred to in
clause 56(1)(c) shall be considered to have been
on extension of service for the period from the
date of retirement to the date of termination of
the proceedings. It is further seen from the said
instruction that during such extension period, the
service rights, which have accrued to the
Government Servant, shall freeze at the level
reached on the date of retirement. It is further
contemplated therein that the salary during that
period shall not exceed the pension which has
accrued to the Government Servant on that date.
Here it is pentinent to note that the “service
rights” referred to in the said instruction deemed
to have been frozen is to be construed not in
respect of the monetary benefits already accrued
in the account of the Government Servant, such as
Earned Leave Salary etc.,. and on the other hand,
the term “service rights” referred to therein is to
mean as referable to increment, promotion etc.
Certainly, “service benefits” already derived
cannot be treated at par with expected or
anticipated “service rights” to prevent the
Government Servant from encashing such leave
salary benefits already accrued in his account. It
is to be noted at this juncture that the above
instruction also contemplates that the salary
during that period not to exceed the pension,
which has accrued to the Government Servant.
12.At this juncture, it is relevant to note
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) No.7920 of 2021
Rule 86(a) of the Fundamental Rules with
Explanation, which reads as follows:-
“86 (a) (i) Leave at the credit of
a Government servant in his leave
account, other than earned leave and
leave on private affairs shall lapse on
the date of retirement or on the date of
termination of the extension of service,
as the case may be. The competent
authority (leave sanctioning authority)
shall suo motu draw and disburse the
cash benefits of encashment of earned
leave and leave on private affairs at the
credit of the Government servants in
Groups B,C and D without formal
sanction orders on the date of
retirement or on the date of termination
of the extension of service, as the case
may be, or on the next working day,
following the date of retirement or the
date of termination of extension of
service if the date of retirement or the
date of termination of extension of
service happens to be a holiday. In 128
respect of Group A officers, the
Accountant General or Pay and
Accounts Officer, as the case may be,
shall suo motu issue the pay slips for
encashment of earned leave and leave
on private affairs, as aforesaid, at the
credit of the Government servants
without formal sanction orders, on the
date of retirement or on the date of
termination of the extension of service,
as the case may be, or on the next
working day, following the date of
retirement or the date of termination of
extension of services if the date of
retirement or the date of termination of
extension of service happens to be a
holiday.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) No.7920 of 2021
(ii) The benefit of encashment of
earned leave at the credit of a
Government servant on the date of
retirement or on the date of termination
of extension of service, as the case may
be, shall be subject to a maximum of
240 days and shall be eligible for cash
equivalent of full leave salary which
shall be based on Pay, Dearness
Allowance, House Rent Allowance and
City Compensatory Allowance for the
entire period of leave at credit.
(iii) The benefit of encashment of
leave on private affairs on the date of
retirement or on the date of termination
of extension of service, as the case may
be, shall be subject to 50 per cent of
the leave on private affairs standing to
the credit of the Government servant on
such date subject to a maximum of 90
days, with full leave salary in cash
which shall be based on Pay, Dearness
Allowance, House Rent Allowance and
City Compensatory Allowance. While
calculating the leave on private affairs
for the above purpose, the fraction of
half-a-day shall be rounded off to one
day. "
“Explanation—
For the purpose of encashment of
earned leave and leave on private
affairs provided in this rule, the
Government servants of the following
categories shall also be eligible :-
(i) cases where the services of a
Government servant has been extended
in the interest of public service beyond
the date of superannuation;
(ii) voluntary or premature
retirement;
(iii) where the services of a
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) No.7920 of 2021
Government servant are terminated by
notice or by payment of pay and
allowances in lieu of notice or
otherwise in accordance with the terms
and conditions of his appointment;
(iv) in the case of death of a
Government servant while in service, to
the family of the deceased;
(v) in the case of leave
preparatory to retirement;
(vi) in cases where the
Government servant has been
compulsorily retired from service as a
measure of punishment under Rule 8 of
the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (D&A)
Rules.
(vii) in cases where the
Government servant has been retired
on medical invalidation;
(viii) the Government servants
who are discharged owing to the
abolition of a permanent post or
retrenched due to the abolition of a
Government deportment or scheme.
[vide G.O. Ms. No. 345, P & AR
(Fr. SPL.), dated 31-7-1990, w.e.f.
29-5-1989.]”
13.Perusal of the above said Rule and the
Explanation would show that even a Government
Servant, whose service is either terminated by
notice or has been compulsorily retired from
service as a measure of punishment and where
the service of such Government Servant has been
extended beyond the date of superannuation, of-
course in the interest of public service, is
certainly entitled for encashment of leave on
private affairs.
14.In other words, it is to be noted that even
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) No.7920 of 2021
a person who is dismissed from service, is also
entitled to the encashment of leave salary. If that
being case, we do not find any logic behind the
contention of the appellant as if such amount can
be paid only after the termination of the
proceedings. In other words, there must be a
specific reason with object for retention of the
said sum, pending disciplinary proceedings. What
the Government Servant is entitled to even at the
worst senorio of dismissal of his service, cannot
be denied to be paid on his request, merely
because, his service is retained.
15.There are two types of monetary benefits
payable to a Government Servant on retirement.
One type of such benefits, such as Earned Leave,
Provident Fund and Special Provident Fund
amount, is a benefit already accrued and got
credited to the account of the employee, which he
is entitled to receive automatically on attaining
superannuation. Those amounts become his
personal property. It makes no difference even if
he is not permitted to retire and a departmental
proceedings is initiated against him. In other
words, those amounts are derived out of like his
“savings” and therefore, the employer cannot
stake any claim or impose any restriction as to
when such amount could be paid to the employee
even after attaining the age of superannuation. In
other words, even as per rules, these amounts are
payable either on the date of superannuation or
on the date of termination of extension of service.
Such payment is to be made even to a person
dismissed from service. When such being the
position, there cannot be any justification on the
part of the employer to retain the said sum by
citing the pendency of proceedings.
16.The other type of monetary benefit
payable to an employee on his retirement, such as
pension, gratuity etc., is certainly not liable to be
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) No.7920 of 2021
paid automatically on the person attaining
superannuation, if the said person is not
permitted to retire and on the other hand,
proceedings are initiated against him and the
same is pending. The outcome of such
proceedings will certainly have a bearing on the
entitlement to get or liability to pay such amount.
Therefore, the person, who attained the age of
superannuation and not to allow retire, based on
pendency of the disciplinary proceedings, cannot
expect the employer to make the payment of
pension and gratuity etc., even before the
proceedings gets terminated, since such liability
is depending upon the outcome of such
proceedings.
17.Next contention of the appellants is in
respect of Rule 7 of the Tamil Nadu Leave Rules,
1933. A careful perusal of the Rule 7 of the said
Rules would again show that even the
Government Servant, who is terminated from
service or compulsorily retired from service as a
measure of punishment, is also entitled for
encashment of Earned Leave and leave on private
affairs. Therefore, the entitlement of such
Government Servant to encash such Earned Leave
and leave on private affairs is not altered even
assuming that he is punished by way of
termination of his service. Therefore, we find that
the contention raised by the appellants on this
ground is also liable to be rejected.
18.It is to be noted at this juncture that
there is no total prohibition or denial of the
benefit sought for by the writ petitioner in any of
the provisions made under the relevant rules. It is
only a time of disbursement of such benefit is
stated. Even as per the rules, these benefits
sought by the writ petitioner become payable
automatic at the relevant point of time.
Therefore, when the entitlement for such payment
is not in question and only the time of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) No.7920 of 2021
disbursement is postponed under a given
circumstance, especially when the retention of
those benefits is not having a bearing on any
eventuality, the Court can interfere and direct
such payment even before the relevant time for
disbursement of such payment, when the
beneficiary seeks to get the same immediately.
When the entitlement is not in dispute, it makes
no difference whether it is paid at the request of
the beneficiary or at a latter date viz., relevant
time, at which, it is liable to be paid.
19.The learned Single Judge of this Court in
a decision reported in 2016(1) LLJ 730 (Mad)
(cited supra) has dealt with the above issue and
found at paragraphs 15 and 16 as follows:-
“ 15. On the other hand, if an
employee has chosen to accumulate his
earned leave to his credit, the
encashment of the same cannot be
deprived on the dismissal, since his
Earned Leave to his credit is nothing but
his property as held by the Full Bench of
the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
16. Likewise, in this case, the issue
is only relating to payment of Earned
Leave Encashment Benefit. The same
principle that is applicable to Earned
Leave Encashment Benefit is also
applicable to the payment of General
Provident Fund and to the contribution
made by a Government employee to
Special Provident Fund. In the case of
industrial employees, the contribution
made by the industrial workman to the
Provident Fund from his wages could not
be deprived by the employer even if he
is dismissed from service.”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) No.7920 of 2021
20.The said decision was approved by the
Division Bench of this Court in W.A(MD)No.1423
of 2018 dated 22.10.2018, wherein the Division
Bench has observed as follows:-
“Challenging the order of the
learned Single Judge, by which the
retiral benefits were sought to be
disbursed to the respondent by the
appellants notwithstanding the pendency
of the criminal case, pending on the date
of superannuation, the present appeal
has been filed.
2.The learned Special Government
Pleader appearing for the appellants
would submit that the order of the
learned Single Judge cannot be
sustained in the eye of law as the
respondent was not permitted to retire,
pending criminal case.
3.The learned Counsel appearing for
the respondent would submit that the
encashment of earned leave is acquiring
a property owned by a person and
therefore, notwithstanding the order of
dismissal, the same cannot be denied.
Reliance has been made on the order of
the learned Single Judge in
T.Veeravinothan Vs. Registrar of Co-
operative Societies, Kilpauk, Chennai
and others reported in 2016-1-LLJ-730
(Mad), wherein it has been held as
follows:
“15.On the other hand, if an
employee has chosen to accumulate his
earned leave to his credit, the
encashment of the same cannot be
deprived on the dismissal, since his
Earned Leave to his credit is nothing but
his property as held by the Full Bench of
the Punjab and Haryana High Court.”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) No.7920 of 2021
4.Considering the above, we are of the
view that the order of the learned Single
Judge giving a direction to the respondents to
disburse all the benefits cannot be sustained,
except to the extent of payment of earned
leave salary alone. In the light of the decision
supra, the encashment of earned leave is to be
treated as a property owned by a person even
one assumes a worst situation by which the
employee is dismissed.
5.In such view of the matter, this Writ
Appeal stands allowed in part. Accordingly,
the appellants are directed to release the
earned leave salary of the respondent within
a period of eight [8] weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
Consequently, the connected miscellaneous
petition is closed.”
21.The another Division Bench of this Court
in W.A.No.207 of 2016 dated 26.02.2016, has
considered the very same issue and observed as
follows:-
“The instant intra-court appeal
arises from the order dated 2nd June,
2015 made in W.P.No.15457 of 2015.
2. The writ petitioner, who is the
respondent herein, filed the writ
petition, seeking direction to the
appellants herein to disburse his
retirement benefits, such as gratuity,
special provident fund, encashment of
earned leave and unearned leave on
private affairs.
3. The respondent herein working
as Electrician in the Electricity Board
was to retire on attaining the age of
superannuation on 30th June, 2013.
However, he was not permitted to do so
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) No.7920 of 2021
on account of pendency of the criminal
case under the provisions of the
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
4. The learned Single Judge,
considering all aspects of the matter,
held that the petitioner was having
earned leave and unearned leave on
private affairs before initiation of the
case and as such, he is entitled to
encashment of earned leave and
unearned leave on private affairs. The
claim of gratuity was given up by the
employee / writ petitioner on the ground
that in the event of conviction and
dismissal of service, the writ petitioner
may not be entitled to get gratuity. The
special provident fund was also not
granted as the writ petitioner failed to
establish any contribution made by him.
While disposing of the writ petition, a
direction was made to the appellants
herein to disburse encashment of
earned leave and encashment of
unearned leave on private affairs. In
respect of special provident fund, it was
held that if any contribution was made
by the writ petitioner, the same can be
paid to the petitioner.
5. We do not find any error,
illegality or infirmity in the order sought
to be impugned in this writ appeal
preferred by the Tamil Nadu Generation
and Electricity Distribution Corporation
Ltd., warranting interference. Thus, the
writ appeal stands dismissed. No costs.
Consequently connected miscellaneous
petition stands closed.”
22.The above said decision of the Division
Bench was put to challenge before the Apex
Court, which, inturn, dismissed the Special Leave
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) No.7920 of 2021
Petition on 06.07.2017 by observing that no
ground to interfere with the impugned order of
the Division Bench.
23.In a recent decision of the Division Bench
reported in 2019-Writ. L.R. 825 [State of Tamil
Nadu vs. V.Mahalingam], the same issue was
considered and it has been observed at paragraph
5 as follows:-
“5. Before proceeding further, it
would be necessary to examine the
nature and legal basis for payment of
'earned leave' to Government Servants.
Rules 7 to 12 of the Tamil Nadu Leave
Rules, 1933, contain the statutory
provisions for earned leave. It could be
seen from the aforesaid provisions that
the leave account of every permanent
Government Servant shall be credited
with earned leave in advance in two
instalments of fifteen days each on the
first day of January and first day of July
every year. The leave at the credit of a
Government Servant at the close of the
previous half year shall be carried
forward to the next half year, subject to
the condition that the leave so carried
forward plus the credit for the half year
do not exceed the maximum limit of 240
days. The said rules further provide that
if the leave standing to the credit of the
Government Servant is not taken within
a year as per the Service Rules, it may
be encashed or accumulated. The
accumulated leave may be availed by the
Government Servant during his tenure of
service or at the time of retirement or
leaving the employment which obviously
means that the right of the Government
Servant to receive
http://www.judis.nic.in the same stands
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) No.7920 of 2021
vested with him during that period itself
which he can utilize at anytime he
chooses. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of
India in State of Jharkhand -vs- Jitendra Kumar
Srivastava [(2013) 12 SCC 210] has made
it abundantly clear that leave
encashment cannot be taken away
without any statutory provision. In short,
'earned leave' which is created by
statute, partakes the character of an
emolument protected as a right to
property of the concerned Government
Servant under Article 300-A of the
Constitution. It has been provided in
Rule 86(a)(i) of the Fundamental Rules
that the Competent Authority shall suo
motu draw and disburse the cash
benefits and encashment of the earned
leave at the credit of the Government
Servant without formal sanction orders
on the date of retirement or the date of
termination of extension of service, as
the case may be. The removal of a
Government Servant from service as a
measure of punishment of conclusion of
disciplinary proceedings after extending
his service on attaining the age of
superannuation for that purpose, would
naturally amount to 'termination of
extension of service', and in terms of
that rule, the Competent Authority on
that date ought to have suo motu
disbursed the cash benefit and
encashment of earned leave, if the same
had not been availed by the Petitioner
earlier. The Second Respondent has
wrongfully refused to pay the earned
leave to the Petitioner, which he was
legitimately entitled to receive, even on
that date.”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) No.7920 of 2021
24.Therefore, we find the present issue is
also certainly similar to the one in the above cases
and thus, we find that the order of the Writ Court
in granting the relief to the writ petitioner need
not be interfered with.
Accordingly, this Writ Appeal fails and
the same is dismissed. No costs. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petition is also
dismissed.”
9. In the said judgment, the Division Bench of this Court has
considered the scope of Rule 7 of the Tamil Nadu Leave Rules 1933 and
Rule 56(1)(c) of the Fundamental Rules. After considering the above
Rules as well as the earlier order of the learned Single Judge and
judgment of the Division Bench of this Court and Hon'ble Apex Court,
dismissed the writ appeal filed by the Government and confirmed the
order of this Court passed in the writ petition, directing the respondents
therein to disburse the leave salary as well as the Special Provident
Fund to the petitioner therein.
10. The ratio in the said judgment referred to above is
squarely applicable to the facts of the present case.
11. In view of the above, the impugned order, dated
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) No.7920 of 2021
26.08.2019 passed by the second respondent is set aside. The
respondents are directed to calculate the amount payable to the
petitioner and pay the eligible encashment of leave salary as well as
Special Provident Fund amount to him.
12. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Index : Yes / No
Internet: Yes / No 29.04.2021
am
Note :
In view of the present lock down owing to
COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the
order may be utilized for official
purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of
the order that is presented is the correct
copy, shall be the responsibility of the
advocate / litigant concerned.
To
1.The District Collector,
Tiruchirappalli District,
Trichy.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Trichy.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) No.7920 of 2021
3.The Tahsildar,
Thiruverumbur Taluk,
Trichy District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD) No.7920 of 2021
V.M.VELUMANI, J.
am /
smn2
W.P.(MD)No.7920 of 2021
29.04.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
