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.
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.
1 Attachment(s) [Login To View]