Dismissed¶30

Rakesh Kumar v. the State of Hp and Another

Himachal Pradesh HC3 Oct 2024CWP/4209/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Earned leave encashment claim of dismissed government servant; forfeiture of leave on dismissal under Rule 9(i) CCS (Leave) Rules, 1972 read with Rule 39; dismissal from service as major penalty under Rule 11(ix) CCS (CCA) Rule, 1965 after conviction under Sections 376D and 506 IPC; claim for interest @ 18%; Himachal Pradesh High Court, Shimla; CWP No. 4209 of 2023; decided 03.10.2024; Justice Ajay Mohan Goel; petition dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Under Rule 9(i) of the CCS (Leave) Rules, 1972 (save as provided in Rule 39), any claim to leave to the credit of a Government servant who is dismissed or removed or who resigns from Government service ceases from the date of such dismissal, removal or resignation. ¶24

Rakesh Kumar Vs the State of Hp and Another — Himachal Pradesh HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

2024:HHC:9517

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT

¶3

SHIMLA

¶4

CWP No. 4209 of 2023 Decided on : 03.10.2024

Rakesh Kumar

…Petitioner

Versus

State of H.P. & anr.

¶9

…Respondents

¶10

Coram

¶11

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge Whether approved for reporting?¹

¶12

For the petitioner : Mr. Jagan Nath, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Rajpal Thakur, Additional Advocate General.

¶13

Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral )

¶14

By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs:-

¶15

“(i) That the directions may kindly be issued to the respondents to pay the Earned Leave Amount along with interest @ 18% per annum to the petitioner with effect from due date i.e. 17.05.2015 till the date of its realization.

¶16

(ii) That the directions may kindly be issued to the

¶17

1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶18

¶19

2024:HHC:9517

¶20

respondents to pay the interest @18% per annum on the amount of Earned Leave amount with effect from 17.05.2014 till the date of its realization.”

¶21

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner joined the service of the respondent-Department on 09.11.2014 and he served as such till 04.08.2016. His grievance is that the Earned Leave to which he is entitled to, has not been released in his favour, accordingly, his prayer is that the Earned Leave be ordered to be released along-with interest.

¶22

The stand of the Department is that the petitioner was convicted qua the commission of offences punishable under Sections 376D and 506 of the India Penal Code and was awarded a sentence of Rigorous Imprisonment for 20 years along-with fine of Rs. 25,000/-. The petitioner was thereafter dismissed from service on 04.08.2016, by imposing a major penalty under Rule 11(ix) of CCS (CCA) Rule, 1965.

¶23

Learned Additional Advocate General submits that

¶24

in terms of CCS (Leave) Rules, 1972, i.e., Rule 9(i) thereof, except as provided in Rule 39 and said Rule, any claim to leave

¶25

Digitally signed by AVNISH KANTto credit of a Government servant, who is dismissed or TIWARI Date: 2024.10.03 18:27:50 UTC

¶26

¶27

2024:HHC:9517

¶28

removed or who resigns from Government service ceases from the date of such dismissal or removal of resignation. He submits that as the petitioner was dismissed from service after his conviction for the commission of a heinous offence, for which he was convicted, the petitioner is not entitled for the Earned Leave amount, as is being prayed for, by the petitioner.

¶29

Learned Counsel for the petitioner could not dispute this legal position.

¶30

Accordingly, as in the peculiar backdrop of the case, this Court does not finds any infirmity in the act of the respondents of not releasing the Earned Leave amount to the petitioner, the petition is dismissed. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.

¶31

(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge

¶32

October 03, 2024 (Shivank Thakur)

Rakesh Kumar v. the State of Hp and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Kumar v. the State of Hp and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Basu Dev and Others Vs State of Hp and Another

Guman Singh Vs State of Hp and Others

Rangila Ram Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Kundan Singh Vs State of Hp and Others

Balveer Singh Vs Roshan Lal Thakur

Jai Dev Sharma and Ors. Vs State of Hp and Ors.