B K KRISHNAN Vs. COLLECTOR OF THE NILGIRIS AND CHAIRMAN BREEKS SCHOOLS AND BOARD OF MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE BREEKS SCHOOLS OOTACAMUND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was working as an Upper Division Clerk designated as Accountant in the respondent-School. According to the petitioner, he retired from service on reaching the age of superannuation on 30.8.2005 and he is entitled for retirement benefits including leave salary on Earned Leave for a maximum period of 240 days and Un-earned Leave on private affairs of 90 days as per G.O. Ms. No. 409, Finance (Pension) Department, dated 31.7.2004. He had 280 days" leave to his credit. In addition to that, he was also entitled to encashment of Leave Salary for 90 days. Even though he is eligible for all these days, he was paid only a sum of Rs. 43,182/- for 90 days of Un-earned Leave on private affairs alone. When he made a representation, the first respondent rejected the same by an order dated 23.11.2005. According to the petitioner, the second respondent-School is run by a Committee headed by the first respondent-District Collector and it is a School affiliated to the Central Board of Secondary Education (for short, "CBSE") and the bye-laws of the CBSE states that every employee shall be entitled to such leave as are admissible to the employees of corresponding status in Government School and encashment and accumulation of leave was also granted as per Government Schools. However, in the present impugned order, the first respondent had stated that since the said School is not receiving any aid from the Government, they cannot implement the Government Order in respect of encashment of Earned Leave and that the Management Committee of the School has decided to grant only a maximum of 90 days" encashment which has been paid already to the petitioner. It is this order that is under challenge in this writ petition.

(2.) I have heard the arguments of Ms. Svetlana Ragurajan, learned counsel appearing for Mr. R. Karthikeyan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. P. Balakrishnan, learned Additional Government Pleader representing the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr. A. Bobblie, learned counsel appearing for the fourth respondent and have perused the records.

(3.) FURTHER, referring to the previous judgment of the Supreme Court in K. Krishnamacharyulu v. Sri Venkateswara Hindu College of Engineering AIR 1998 SC 295: (1997) 3 SCC 571: 2001-III-LLJ- (Suppl)-1454, the Court held in paragraph 4 of the judgment as follows: