JAIPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. MOHAL LAL RAJAWAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant second appeal has been filed by the defendant-appellant assailing judgment & decree dt.12/03/2015 passed by the lower appellate court in Civil Regular Appeal No.09/2013 by which the appeal preferred by the plaintiff-respondent has been allowed and the defendant-appellant has been directed to extend all the benefits alongwith cash payment for terminal leave to the plaintiff-respondent against 300 days of privilege leave accumulated in his account within a period of two months.

(2.) Brief facts noticed on perusal of the appeal are that the respondent was an employee of the Jaipur Development Authority and after rendering service retired as an accountant on 31/12/1991. Thereafter taking into consideration about his efficient services as per contract, he was taken into service again on 30/06/1992 at the rate of Rs.2000/- per month for one year. Consequent thereto, he joined on 08/07/1992 in the office of the JDA as an accountant. The respondent continued to work as an accountant from 08/07/1992 to 31/12/2002. On and from 31/12/2002, the salary was raised to Rs.3,500/- per month. Though civil suit filed by the respondent came to be rejected vide judgment and decree dated.15/04/2013 but on an appeal filed before the first appellate court, the appellate court quashed and set aside the judgment and decree dt.15/04/2013 of the trial court and held that the respondent was entitled to 300 days privilege leave encashment which is assailed herein.

(3.) Ld. counsel for the appellant contended that the order of the first appellate court is perverse and the respondent was not entitled to the payment of privilege leave against 300 days of privilege leave accumulated in his account. He further contended that in Para 2 of the appendix 2 of Rajasthan Service Rules, there is a specific provision that if the contract is for a longer term than 5 years, then same rule shall apply as is applicable to an officer in the permanent employment. He further contended that the plain language of appendix 2 of the Rajasthan Service Rules is clear on this issue and it states that the Government Servant engaged on contract in connection with the affairs of the Government shall be governed by the leave rules for the time being in force subject to the provisions of the contract and taking note of the contract, he contended that except the amount of Rs. 2,000/- per month, no amount was payable to him over and above the said fixed pay and thus contended that the order of the first appellate court deserves to be quashed and set aside and substantial question of law arise out of the order of the first appellate court.