Punjab-Haryana High Court
State Of Haryana And Others vs Ram Kumar Shastri And Another on 30 January, 2013
Bench: A.K.Sikri, Rakesh Kumar Jain
L.P.A.No. 908 of 2012 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
L.P.A.No. 908 of 2012
Date of Decision:30.1.2013
State of Haryana and others
--Appellants
Vs.
Ram Kumar Shastri and another
--Respondents
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN,JUDGE Present: Mr. R.K.S.Brar, Addl.A.G,Haryana, for the appellants Mr. R.N.Sharma,Advocate, for the respondents A.K.SIKRI, CJ: (Oral) In this appeal filed by the State of Haryana against the judgment of the learned Single Judge, the only issue pertains to the claim of leave encashment of the respondent No.1, herein.
The respondent was a Sanskrit Teacher appointed by S. D. High School, Jind , which is an Aided School. He retired from service of the said school on 31.12.1998. As some dispute arose about terminal benefits payable to the respondent herein, he filed L.P.A.No. 908 of 2012 2 C.W.P.No.3339 of 2000 in this Court which has been decided by the learned Single Judge on 15.2.2012.
As already pointed out above, other terminal benefits like pension, gratuity etc, qua which directions are given by the learned Single Judge, is not the subject matter of the present appeal. Learned Single Judge has held that the respondent herein, is entitled to encashment of leave which accumulates to his credit at the time of retirement. This direction is given following the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of State of Rajasthan and another Versus. Senior Higher Secondary School, Lachhmangarh and others 2005 (10) SCC 346.
The submission of the learned counsel for the State of Haryana is that the aforesaid judgment rendered in the context of the statute, would have no application insofar as the State of Haryana is concerned as the State of Haryana has its own rules. Our attention is draw to the Haryana School Education Rules, 2003. Rule 83 (1) and Rule 91 (5) whereof are reproduced for our purpose:-
i. Rule 83: (1) The scale of pay of all the employees shall be such as specified in column 4 of Appendix A to these rules and modified/ revised by the Government from time to time ii. Rule 91 (5): The benefit of leave encashment, facilities of leave travel concession, bonus and medical reimbursement etc. shall be at the discretion of the management committee. No grant in aid on this account shall be reimbursed by the Department".
It is specifically provided in Rule 91 (5) that insofar as L.P.A.No. 908 of 2012 3 benefits of leave encashment is concerned, no grant-in-aid on this count would be reimbursed by the department. It is left to the discretion of the Managing Committee to provide such benefits as well as benefits on account of leave travel concession and bonus etc. The respondent herein, in the writ petition filed by him had impleaded the State of Haryana (appellant herein as respondent No.1.) and S.D.High School, Jind as respondent No.4. Thus, insofar as respondent No.1 is concerned, it is not supposed to make any reimbursement on account of claim of leave encashment. Liability in that behalf shall be of the school.
Insofar as the School/Managing Committee is concerned, it is liable to make payment to the respondents. The case in this behalf would be governed by the orders contained in Memo bearing F.D. Hr.NO.11/30/87-IFR-II dated 09.4.1987, which pertains to grant of earned leave to the teachers of the private aided/unaided institutions. It, inter-alia, provides that the teachers of these schools also shall be permitted 10 days earned leave on full pay during the year in lieu of 20 days half pay leave which was prevalent prior to the issuance of these instructions. It also provides that encashment would be admissible to teachers suo motu as to other government servants subject to the fulfilments of the prescribed conditions.
Insofar as the appeal of the State is concerned, same is allowed holding that government is not liable to pay any amount on L.P.A.No. 908 of 2012 4 account of encashment of leave to the respondent-teachers. However, the payment would be made by the S.D.High School, Jind where the respondent was employed.
Appeal disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
(A.K.SIKRI)
CHIEFJUSTICE
30.1.2013 (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN )
rr JUDGE