Petitioner, an Assistant Teacher, filed a writ petition seeking direction to pay outstanding post-retiral dues, specifically leave encashment, as other benefits were already received after retirement.
Direction to respondent no. 7 to pay Rs.4,91,000/- as leave encashment to the petitioner within four weeks.
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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (S) No. 2320 of 2020
Arundhuti Deb … PETITIONER
Vs.
… … RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DR. S. N. PATHAK
For the Petitioner : Ms. Sarita Gupta, Advocate For the Respondents : Ms. Shilpi, AC to SC (Mines) For the Accountant General : Mr. Rupesh Singh, Advocate
11/24.11.2021 Heard the parties.
2. Instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for a direction upon the respondents to pay post retiral dues to her who retired on 31.10.2019 as an Assistant Teacher from Rohini Girls School, Rohini, Deoghar.
3. It is case of the petitioner that though after retirement she had submitted all the required documents to the office of the Accountant General, Ranchi and even PPO was issued for payment of pension and DCR Gratuity but the same has not been paid to her till date and hence this writ petition.
4. Ms. Sarita Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner assiduously argues that though the required documents were submitted in the office of the Accountant General and PPO was issued for payment of pension and DCR Gratuity subject to production of No Dues Certificate. No Dues Certificate has already been submitted but still payments have not been made and hence this writ petition has been filed. After filing of the
RC
2
writ petition, payments have already been made save and except amount towards leave encashment to the tune of Rs.4,91,000/-.
5. Ms. Shilpi, AC to learned SC (Mines) representing State submits that petitioner had not handed over several documents, furniture, utility of the schools etc. and as such No Dues Certificate was not issued to her. In absence of No Dues Certificate, the post retiral benefits was delayed. After submission of those things, petitioner was given No Dues Certificate and thereafter entire payments were made. On query made to the respondents regarding payments of leave encashment, learned counsel submits that she has no instruction in that regard.
6.
7.
Mr. Rupesh Singh, learned counsel representing office of the Accountant General, very fairly submits that in the year 2019 itself, after three years of the retirement of the petitioner, entire amount was sanctioned and PPO was issued but it was delayed at the hands of DSE and other officers responsible for making payments. There was no delay on part of the Accountant General.
Heard learned counsel for the parties across the bar. Since payment have already been made regarding post retiral benefits, save and except leave encashment, I, hereby, direct the respondent no. 7 to pay the amount of leave encashment to the tune of Rs.4,91,000/- to the petitioner as claimed after proper verification within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order.
8. With the aforementioned observations and directions this writ petition stands disposed of.
( Dr. S.N. Pathak, J. )
RC
3 issues framed by the court
Whether petitioner is entitled to payment of unclaimed leave encashment after retirement.
Whether direction can be issued to respondent no. 7 to pay the specific amount of leave encashment to the petitioner.
Whether writ petition should be disposed of considering that most post-retiral benefits have already been paid.
Arundhuti Deb
State of Jharkhand
Secretary, School Education and Literacy Department, Govt. of Jharkhand
Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar
District Superintendent of Education, Deoghar
Accountant General, Ranchi
Dr. S. N. Pathak
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
