MOOL RAJ KOTWAL Vs. STATE OF SIKKIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner retired from service as a Medical Specialist on 31/1/2005. On 1/2/2005, the petitioner was re-employed as Medical Advisor-cum-Chief Consultant in the STNM Hospital initially and thereafter, for short periods in various capacities until 2019. On 28/5/2019, the petitioner was relieved from his assignment as Principal Medical Advisor to the Hon'ble Chief Minister on reemployment, w.e.f., 31/5/2019. On 31/5/2019, the Department of Personnel, Adm. Reforms, Training and Public Grievances, Government of Sikkim (DOPART), issued Office Order No.710/G/DOP allowing the petitioner to draw cash equivalent to leave salary in lieu of 300 days unutilized earned leave standing to his credit as on 31/5/2019. On 27/2/2020, Office Memorandum No.4528/GEN/DOP was issued seeking to clarify on leave encashment of earned leave to government employees on extension of service, reemployment, etc. It provided:

(2.) On 21/5/2020, the DOPART issued Office Order No.493/G/DOP cancelling Office Order No.710/G/DOP dtd. 31/5/2019, which allowed the petitioner to draw cash equivalent to leave salary in lieu of 300 days of unutilized earned leave standing due to his credit as on 31/5/2019. On 21/3/2022, letter bearing No.GOS/HOME/Acctt./726 was issued by the Home Department intimating the petitioner that the DOPART vide Office Order No.493/G/DOP dtd. 21/5/2020 has cancelled the Office Order No.710/G/DOP dtd. 31/5/2019. This communication informed the petitioner that they were unable to release the payment as desired by him.

(3.) Aggrieved by the denial of the benefit under Rule 36 of the Sikkim Government Service (Leave) Rules, 1982 (the Leave Rules), the petitioner has approached this court invoking its extraordinary writ jurisdiction seeking an appropriate writ to quash Office Order No.493/G/DOP dtd. 21/5/2020 issued by the DOPART; letter bearing No. GOS/HOME/Acctt./726 dtd. 21/3/2022 issued by the Home Department as well as a declaration that Office Memorandum No.4528/GEN/DOP dtd. 27/2/2020 is not applicable to the petitioner's case as it would not have retrospective effect. The petitioner also seeks a declaration that he is entitled to leave encashment of Rs.20,51,100.00 as per Rule 32 read with Rule 36 of the Leave Rules for the period of 2005 to 2019 during the period of his reemployment. The petitioner seeks further declaration that he is also entitled to leave encashment as similarly placed reemployed employees for the same period who were also given the benefit under the said provisions. The petitioner seeks a direction upon the respondents to disclose the list of beneficiaries of all the government employees who got the benefit of leave encashment on being re-employed as on 21/5/2020.