The High Court directed the District Superintendent of Education, Ranchi, to pay leave encashment with admissible interest within six weeks, holding the matter is settled by the Apex Court.
Direction to respondent No. 3 to pay leave encashment within six weeks from the date of receipt of the order.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (S) No. 449 of 2020
Rahil Barla.
… …Petitioner
-Versus-
CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DR. S.N.PATHAK
For the Petitioner :Mr. Madan Mohan Pan, Advocate. For the Respondents :Mr. Anoop Kumar Mehta, A.A.G. III.
03/ 13.02.2020 The petitioner has approached this Court for direction upon the respondents, particularly the respondent No.3, to make payment of amount of the leave encashment with admissible interest.
Mr. M.M.Pan, learned Counsel for the petitioner strenuously argues that
the respondents are bound to make payment under the head of leave encashment in view of the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of “Mariyam Tirkey vrs. The State of Jharkhand & Others” in W,P.(S) No. 506 of 2013 , reported in 2014 (1) JBCJ 465 and as such a direction be given to the respondents to pay the amount of leave encashment within a stipulated period.
On the other hand, no counter affidavit has been filed, but it has been fairly submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents, that issue has already been decided and if the petitioner files a representation, the same will be considered and a reasoned order will be passed regarding payment of leave encashment. The learned Counsel further argues that in absence of any counter-affidavit, he is unable to say as to why the amount of leave encashment was not paid, though the issue has been settled up to the Apex Court.
2
Having heard the submissions of the parties, this Court is of the considered view that the issue is now no more res integra as the same has been set at rest by the Hon’ble Apex Court. As a cumulative effect of the aforesaid rules, guidelines, judicial pronouncements, I hereby direct the respondent No.3, the District Education Officer, Ranchi to pay the amount of leave encashment
within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Accordingly, the writ petition stands allowed.
P.K.S.
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the respondent is directed to pay the amount of leave encashment with admissible interest.
Whether the issue is res integra after the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court.
Whether a direction be given to the respondents to pay the amount of leave encashment within a stipulated period.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Mariyam Tirkey vrs. The State of Jharkhand & OthersRelied on¶15
2014 (1) JBCJ 465
Rahil Barla
The State of Jharkhand
The Director, Primary Education, Human Resources Development Department, Govt. of Jharkhand
The District Superintendent of Education, Ranchi
Dr. S.N. Pathak
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
