Allowed

Nivrutti Yadav Khadse and Ors. v. State of Mah and Ors.

Bombay HC25 Oct 2016WP/5555/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order confirms the entitlement of retired employees to earn leave encashment, relying on Supreme Court precedent, and directs the management/authors to determine the payable amount expeditiously and pay it within six months along with interest.

What did the court decide?

Respondents to determine payable leave encashment amount within 3 months and pay it with 9% interest within 6 months.

Nivrutti Yadav Khadse and Ors. Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

46-wp5555-07.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 5555 OF 2007

¶4

1. Nivrutti s/o Yadav Khadse, Age 69 years, Occu: Pensioner, R/o 17, Nutan Varsha Colony, Jalgaon, Dist. Jalgaon.

¶5

2. Shantaram Laxman Patil Age 67 years, Occu: Pensioner R/o 2B, Navprabhat Society, Behind District Industries Centre, Jalgaon.

¶6

3. Narayan Punjo Patil Age 68 years, Occu: Pensioner R/o Near Water Tank, Faizpur, Tq. Yawal, Dist. Jalgaon

¶7

4. Onkar Natthu Narkhede ... Petitioners Age 77 years, Occu: Pensioner, R/o 144, Mohannagar, Jalgaon, Dist. Jalgaon.

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

1. The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Education Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai 32.

¶10

2. The Joint Director of Education, Jalgaon, Dist. Jalgaon.

¶11

3. The Registrar, North Maharashtra University, Jalgaon, Dist. Jalgaon.

¶12

4. The President, Tapi Parisar Vidya Mandal, Jalgaon at Jalgaon.

¶13

5. The Principal, ... Respondents.

¶14

1/4

¶15

46-wp5555-07.odt

¶16

Tapi Parisar Vidya Mandal's
Dhanaji Nana Mahavidyalaya,
Faizpur, Dist. Jalgaon

¶17

Mr. Vijay Y. Patil, h/for Mr.A.T. Telhar, Advocate for
the petitioner,

¶18

Mr. M. B. Bharaswadkar, AGP for respondents 1&2-State.
Mr. Y.B. Bolkar, Advocate h/for Mr. A.B.Girase,
Advocate for respondent No.3,

¶19

Mrs. Chaitaliu Kutti, Advocate h/for Mr. P. N. Kutti,
Advocate for respondents 4 and 5.

¶20

CORAM: S. V. GANGAPURWALA &
K. L. WADANE, JJ.
 DATE:
25th October, 2016

¶21

JUDGMENT:

¶22

1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶23

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With

¶24

consent of parties, the petition is taken up for final
disposal

¶25

3. Mr. Patil, the learned counsel for the

¶26

petitioner submits that the petitioners are retired

¶27

employees of respondent No.5. Amount of leave
encashment is not paid to the petitioners. The
management is required to pay the said amount. The

¶28

learned counsel relies on the judgment of the Division

¶29

Bench of this Court dated 20th August, 2014 in Writ
Petition No. 625 of 2014 with connected matters. The

¶30

learned counsel further submits that even the

¶31

2/4

¶32

46-wp5555-07.odt

¶33

Grievance Committee also recommended the claim of the
petitioners.

¶34

4. Mrs. Kutti, the learned counsel for respondents
4 and 5 submits that the petition is bad on account of
delay and latches. The learned counsel submits that
the recommendation of the Grievance committee is not

¶35

binding. The Grievance Committee did not hear the
respondents 4 and 5 Management. The Management has
not taken any decision on the same. The petition does
not disclose for how many days, the petitioners
actually worked and how much leave was surrendered. In
absence of any pleadings, the relief claimed by the
petitioners cannot be granted. Statute 424(C) cannot
be expected to confer dual benefit.

¶36

5. Mr.Bolkar, the learned counsel for respondent
University states that the University has rightly
recommended the grant of benefit of leave encashment
to the petitioners.

¶37

6. We heard learned AGP also.

¶38

7. The issue that the employees, at the relevant

¶39

time, were entitled for the benefits of leave
encashment and it is only the management which is

¶40

3/4

¶41

46-wp5555-07.odt

¶42

responsible to pay the same is no longer res integra.

¶43

The same has been held by the Apex Court in case of
State of Maharashtra & others Vs. Nowrosjee Wadia
College and others in Civil Appeal Nos. 531-532 of
2013. We have also held so in Writ petition No. 625 of
2014 with connected writ petitions under order dated
20th August, 2014.

¶44

8. In light of above, we pass the following order.

¶45

O R D E R

¶46

I. The Respondent Nos.4 and 5 shall determine
the amount payable to the Petitioners with
regard to the benefit of Encashment of
Unutilized Earned Leave, expeditiously and
preferably within a period of three (3) months
from today.

¶47

II. Upon determination of the amount, the
Respondent Nos.4 and 5 shall pay the said amount
to the Petitioners within a period of six (6)
months thereafter alongwith interest at the rate
of 9% per annum simple interest from the date of
their entitlement till the payment.

¶48

9. Rule is made absolute accordingly. There shall
be no order as to costs.

¶49

(K. L. WADANE, J.) (S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. )
JPC

¶50

4/4

Nivrutti Yadav Khadse and Ors. v. State of Mah and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nivrutti Yadav Khadse and Ors. v. State of Mah and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dargah Hazrat Khaja Muntajiboddin Zar Zarri Zar Baksh through Its President Shaikh Munibuddin M Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bharat Premchand Chaudhari Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Eknath Ganpatrao Shinde Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Rameshwar Baburao Waghmare Vs Chairman Aurangabad Jalna Gramin Bank and Ors.

Nandkumar Kundlik Wagh and Another Vs the Union of India and Others

Vidya Bharat Kaware Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others