High CourtsSingle Bench(2013) 08 P&H CK 0394

Ramesh Chander (deceased) through LRs. vs The State of Haryana and Others

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 5 August 2013

HON’BLE JUDGES
M.M.S. Bedi, J
RESULT
Disposed Off
CASE NUMBER
CWP No. 22370 of 2010

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

2 paragraphs · 370 words

M.M.S. Bedi, J.—The petitioner (since deceased) having retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 03.11.2007, through instant writ petition sought a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to grant leave encashment alongwith interest from the date of retirement till the date of payment claiming that the Vaish Technical Institute, Rohtak, respondent No. 4 managed by respondent No. 3 Managing Committee is a privately managed Government aided institute. After going through the facts and circumstances of the case, and hearing the counsel for both the sides, I am of the considered opinion that the entitlement of an employee of an Institute which is privately managed but receiving grant in aid from the State Government under Grant in Aid Scheme is no more res-integra in view of the judgment passed by the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 4112 of 2003 titled as State of Haryana Vs. R.K. Bansal, confirming the order dated 26.08.2002 passed by Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 3096 of 2001 titled as R.K. Bansal Vs. The State of Haryana and others issuing a direction to make payment of leave encashment with interest @ 18% p.a. Similar is the ratio of a judgment in CWP No. 11373 of 2003, Chand Singh Pehal Vs. The State of Haryana and others decided on 3rd December, 2012, in which while disposing of a bunch of petitions regarding leave encashment with interest @ 6% per annum from the date it accrued, this Court had held that the Management of the institute would make the payment to the petitioners on account of benefit of leave encashment with liberty to claim reimbursement of the same from the State Government in accordance with law.

2.

In view of above circumstances, it is held that the petitioner now represented by his LR, is entitled to the benefit of leave encashment. Management-respondent No. 3 is directed to make the payment to the petitioner on account of benefit of leave encashment within three months from today alongwith interest @ 6% per annum from the date it accrued till its realization with liberty to the Management to claim reimbursement of the same from the State Government in accordance with law. Disposed of.