Significant Judgment on Leave Encashment
In a significant judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that the accumulated unutilized leave of an employee cannot be reduced to 300 days, even if the employee is entitled to leave encashment for a maximum of 300 days.
The ruling came in the case of Haryana Government employees after the High Court was informed that accumulated earned leave was repeatedly reduced to 300 days during the course of service, based on the assumption that they were entitled to a maximum of 300 days of earned leave. Eventually, when the time came for encashment of unutilized earned leave, employees were granted the benefit for a lesser number of days.
“If an employee is entitled to leave encashment for a maximum limit of 300 days, that does not mean that the accumulated unutilized leave is to be reduced to 300 days if it exceeds the limit. The earned leave will continue to accumulate until the retirement of the petitioners, and the petitioners are to be granted the maximum benefit of 300 days, as stated in the rules,” Justice Kuldip Singh ruled.
The ruling came on a petition by Jaipal Phogat and another petitioner against the State of Haryana and other respondents. Justice Kuldip Singh asserted that the "unfortunate controversy" was regarding the method used to calculate unutilized earned leave for petitioners Jaipal Phogat and Jaibhagwan.
Retired mechanics, the petitioners had claimed that they were entitled to leave encashment of 300 days of unutilized earned leave. Petitioner number one was entitled to 300 days of leave encashment but was granted the benefit of 257 days. Petitioner number two, on the other hand, was entitled to 268 days of leave encashment but was granted the benefit of 211 days.
During the course of the hearing, Justice Kuldip Singh asked both parties to file calculation sheets. He added that the examination of the calculation sheet regarding Phogat showed mischief was done while calculating unutilized earned leave on April 27, 1999, May 22, 2003, and October 31, 2007.
The unutilized earned leave for 362 days, 375 days, and 335 days, respectively, was reduced to 300 days on the assumption that the petitioner was entitled to a maximum of 300 days of earned leave.
Similarly, in Jaibhagwan’s case, earned leave was reduced on August 11, 2002, May 22, 2003, and August 22, 2003, from 308 days, 307 days, and 305 days, respectively.
“The calculation done by the respondents is not only mischievous but also a wrong application of the principle of calculation of unutilized earned leave. As such, the calculations made by the petitioners are accepted, and those of the respondents are set aside,” the High Court ruled.
From India, Malappuram
Acknowledge(2)
Amend(0)
1446In a significant judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that the accumulated unutilized leave of an employee cannot be reduced to 300 days, even if the employee is entitled to leave encashment for a maximum of 300 days.
The ruling came in the case of Haryana Government employees after the High Court was informed that accumulated earned leave was repeatedly reduced to 300 days during the course of service, based on the assumption that they were entitled to a maximum of 300 days of earned leave. Eventually, when the time came for encashment of unutilized earned leave, employees were granted the benefit for a lesser number of days.
“If an employee is entitled to leave encashment for a maximum limit of 300 days, that does not mean that the accumulated unutilized leave is to be reduced to 300 days if it exceeds the limit. The earned leave will continue to accumulate until the retirement of the petitioners, and the petitioners are to be granted the maximum benefit of 300 days, as stated in the rules,” Justice Kuldip Singh ruled.
The ruling came on a petition by Jaipal Phogat and another petitioner against the State of Haryana and other respondents. Justice Kuldip Singh asserted that the "unfortunate controversy" was regarding the method used to calculate unutilized earned leave for petitioners Jaipal Phogat and Jaibhagwan.
Retired mechanics, the petitioners had claimed that they were entitled to leave encashment of 300 days of unutilized earned leave. Petitioner number one was entitled to 300 days of leave encashment but was granted the benefit of 257 days. Petitioner number two, on the other hand, was entitled to 268 days of leave encashment but was granted the benefit of 211 days.
During the course of the hearing, Justice Kuldip Singh asked both parties to file calculation sheets. He added that the examination of the calculation sheet regarding Phogat showed mischief was done while calculating unutilized earned leave on April 27, 1999, May 22, 2003, and October 31, 2007.
The unutilized earned leave for 362 days, 375 days, and 335 days, respectively, was reduced to 300 days on the assumption that the petitioner was entitled to a maximum of 300 days of earned leave.
Similarly, in Jaibhagwan’s case, earned leave was reduced on August 11, 2002, May 22, 2003, and August 22, 2003, from 308 days, 307 days, and 305 days, respectively.
“The calculation done by the respondents is not only mischievous but also a wrong application of the principle of calculation of unutilized earned leave. As such, the calculations made by the petitioners are accepted, and those of the respondents are set aside,” the High Court ruled.
From India, Malappuram
Acknowledge(2)Amend(0)
Is this applicable to PAN India, I have seen a lot of MNC, Indian companies have capping of earned leaves carry forward limited to 60 or so, any idea is this right?
From United States, undefined
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From United States, undefined
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The standing orders, Factory Act, and Shop & Establishment Act provide a framework that the company must adhere to. In this scenario, it is acceptable to state that all leaves must be utilized or they will lapse.
In this specific situation, there were no restrictions on carrying forward leaves, only on encashment.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(1)
Amend(0)
In this specific situation, there were no restrictions on carrying forward leaves, only on encashment.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
Understanding Labor Laws in Private Companies
Various labor rules and acts are not clear and are not widely known or practiced by private companies. It often takes court cases to bring these issues to light. However, due to a lack of knowledge in labor laws, many private companies choose to interpret them to their own advantage. Many workers, fearing for their jobs and future, do not claim their basic rights as provided by law.
Employee Rights to Earned Leave
In general, a company cannot restrict earned leave as it is the right of the employee. Employees should have the option to adjust their leave or receive compensation for their hard-earned leave through encashment.
From India
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Various labor rules and acts are not clear and are not widely known or practiced by private companies. It often takes court cases to bring these issues to light. However, due to a lack of knowledge in labor laws, many private companies choose to interpret them to their own advantage. Many workers, fearing for their jobs and future, do not claim their basic rights as provided by law.
Employee Rights to Earned Leave
In general, a company cannot restrict earned leave as it is the right of the employee. Employees should have the option to adjust their leave or receive compensation for their hard-earned leave through encashment.
From India
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR is an AI-augmented HR knowledge and collaboration platform, enabling HR professionals to solve real-world challenges, validate decisions, and stay ahead through collective intelligence and machine-enhanced guidance. Join Our Platform.
No issue cap for Maternity Leave-Madras High Court.pdf
Basic wages & allw.-Madras High Court ruling on the applicability of Provident Fund.docx