PRABHUDAN TIRKEY Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) According to these petitioners, they have retired from the Non-Government recognized Aided Minority Schools in the district of Simdega from the post of Assistant Teacher. The name of petitioners, name of Schools and their respective dates of retirement as furnished in a chart by the learned counsel for the petitioners is indicated herein under:--

(2.) According to these petitioners, their only grievance is that leave encashment amount for the period of earned leave they had earned in their favour in their service career, have not been paid by the respondents on the plea that the same is inadmissible to them in view of a circular dated 29.6.1983 issued by the erstwhile Government of Bihar. These petitioners have otherwise received rest of the post retirement dues.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue relating to admissibility of leave encashment amount of such retired teachers of Non-Government recognized Aided Minority High Schools have been finally determined by the judgment rendered in the case of Mariyam Tirkey v. The State of Jharkhand & Ors., 2014 1 JLJR 465in W.P. (S) No. 506 of 2013 and its analogous cases vide judgment dated 3.1.2014 by the Division Bench of this Court. It is submitted that the said resolution has been considered by the Division Bench of this Court. In the said judgment reference made by the learned Single Bench has been answered by holding that such Assistant Teacher whose services were approved and who were receiving salary etc. by way of grant in aid from the State Government during their service career are also entitled for the payment of leave encashment amount upon their retirement apart from post retirement benefits. In some of these cases, counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents while in other cases, no counter affidavit could be filed as some of them have been filed only recently. The stand in one of the writ petition i.e. W.P. (S) No. 4457 of 2013 by the respondent No. 2, District Superintendent of Education, Simdega is based upon the circular of 29.6.1983 and further 20.2.1990. As per the stand of the respondents, the petitioners in the said cases are not entitled for the benefit of leave encashment in view of the import of the said circular.