Court No. - 18
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 8932 of 2018 Petitioner :- Satish Chandra Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 05 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Awadh Narain Rai Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner is before this Court for a direction to the respondents to provide the facility of leave encashment to the petitioner with immediate effect along with interest.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that similar controversy has also been raised in Writ-A No.29685 of 2015 (Phul Chandra Mishra & Anr. v. State of U.P. & Ors.) and the same has been allowed vide order dated 21.05.2015 and as such it is contended that similar direction may also be passed in this writ petition also. The relevant portion of the order dated 21.05.2015 is quoted as under:-
" Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were initially appointed on 28.4.1979 and 12.2.1974 on the post of Junior Clerk in U.P. Basic Shiksha Parishad and have retired on attaining the age of superannuation 30.6.2014 and 31.7.2014 respectively.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that employees of the recognized school by the U.P. Basic Shiksha Parishad are getting the benefit of leave encashment. In this regard the U.P. Basic Shiksha Parishad, Karmarchari Union through its President had raised grievance before the respondent nos. 2 and 3 and the Director of Basic Education/Chairman of Basic Education Board U.P. was made certain proposal on 24.02.2006 and the same was sent to the State Government for consent.
Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that certain employee namely Rajeshwar Prasad Singh had filed Claim Petition No. 381 of 1998 before the State Public Services Tribunal, Lucknow and, thereafter, the Tribunal vide order dated 15.05.1999 had given direction to the State Government for providing facility of leave encasement to the employees of U.P. Basic Shiksha Parishad. He further submits that aggrieved with the direction issued by the State Public Services Tribunal, Lucknow, the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Agra and others had filed Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 8832 of 2000, which was dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.07.2004.
Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the order dated 22.07.2004 passed by the Division Bench of this Court had also been assailed before Hon'ble Supreme Court by filling Civil Appeal No(s). 538 of 2007 (Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Agra and others Vs. Rajeshwar Prasad Singhal and others). The said Civil Appeal was dismissed in default vide order dated 10.03.2011.
In these circumstances, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in the identical facts and circumstances of the case the Division Bench has already decided the controversy in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 8832 of 2000 and same has been assailed before Hon'ble Supreme Court by filling Civil Appeal No(s). 538 of 2007 (Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Agra and others Vs. Rajeshwar Prasad Singhal and others). The said Civil Appeal was also dismissed in default vide order dated 10.03.2011. Therefore, the petitioners are also entitle for leave encashment and there is no other impediment in not granting the same benefit to the petitioners.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has already brought on record the order dated 10.03.2011 passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court, by which the S.L.P. which had been filed by the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Agra, had been dismissed in default, but at the same time it is also apparent that respondents have not brought anything on record, by which it can be ascertained that order dated 10.03.2011 had been recalled.
Therefore, in view of the above, the writ petition is allowed, with a direction to the respondents to calculate and pay the due amount as payable towards the leave encashment to the petitioners, within a period of two months time from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order, before them."
So far as the factual and legal aspect is concerned, the same is not being disputed by learned counsel for the respondents.
In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the writ petition is allowed with a direction to the respondents to calculate and pay the due amount as payable towards the leave encashment to the petitioners, within a period of two months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order before them.
Order Date :- 29.3.2018 SP/