GANDA SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is said to have been retired from the Punjab Government on attaining the age of superannuation on 16.01.9174 as PCMS Class 1. The last drawn pay of the petitioner was said to be Rs.1952.87. The grievance of the petitioner is twofold: (i) he had not been paid the cash equivalent in respect of the period of earned leave to his credit at the time of retirement and (ii), the denial of retrial benefits as per the provisions contained in the Punjab Instructions dated 09.07.1985 from March 31, 1985.

(2.) The petitioner would rely on the instructions of the Punjab Government to enable the employees retired on superannuation on or after 31.01.1978 to be paid the cash equivalent to leave salary in respect of period of earned leave to their credit at the time of retirement. The only restriction was the number of days for which such benefit could be claimed. The reliance was placed on the instructions issued on 24.11.1988 by the Department of Finance, Government of Punjab to all Heads of Departments. In so far it is relevant to the case, the instructions included, ''encashment of leave at the time of retirement shall be admissible upto 240 days to those employees, who opt for the revised orders contained in this circular letter, the other conditions shall remain unchanged.'' The latter part of the same communication also states that ''decision contained in the circular letter shall be effective from the date of issue except decisions regarding encashment of leave, which will be admissible to those women employees also, who had proceeded on maternity leave before the date of issue of circular letter.''

(3.) The Government has filed the reply stating that this benefit was extended only to those Government employees, who retired from service on or after 30.09.1977 as per the instructions contained in the letter of the Government dated 25.01.1978 and 12.09.1977, which originally restricted the claim to 180 days. Later, by virtue of the circular, the number of days were enlarged to 240 days but this was also applicable only w.e.f. 01.01.1986. Since the petitioner had retired from service on 16.01.1974, he was not entitled to the said benefit. Making provision for application of certain benefits with a specified cut off date, cannot at all times be said to be arbitrary. The provision for leave encashment for 240 days came through 3rd Punjab Pay Commission and if there was no particular provision, which was available for such facility at the time when the petitioner retired, then such a benefit cannot be claimed. The petitioner cannot rely on a notification that came on 24.11.1988 and if he should place such a reliance, then he should read other portion of the said circular also to claim the benefit. I have already abstracted the portion of the circular, which clearly laid down that the decision contained in the circular shall be effective only from the date of issue, which in this case, was issued on 24.11.1988. The only exception was in the case of engagement of leave admissible to women employees, who proceeded on maternity leave. The claim of the petitioner, therefore, to leave encashment is not justified.