STATE OF BIHAR Vs. ALICE PURTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the applications arise out of the same case so both have been heard together.

(2.) THE Civil Review Petition has been filed for reviewing the order dated 20.8.2002 passed in CWJC No. 2161 of 1999 (R) whereby and whereunder the Court allowed the writ petition considering the Annexure -7 appended to that writ and Annexure -10 an order passed by a learned Single Judge in MJC No. 243 of 1995 (R) and directed the respondent of the writ (who are the petitioners in the Review Petition) to pay the amounts due including "Leave Encashment", that portion of the impugned order which directs for the payment of Leave Encashment is sought to be reviewed on the ground that in the MJC (Annexure -10, Supra) the Court has granted this benefit of Leave Encashment to the petitioners of the MJC on the concession made by the learned counsel for the State which though was against the express provisions of Annexure -1 appended to writ petition and thus that concision could not have been used as a precedent in violation of the express provision as contained in Annexure -1 of the writ and Annexure -3 of this Review petition.

(3.) THERE can be no denial that leave encashment is also available to teaching and non -teaching Government employee.