Service Law--Leave Encashment--Employee who has been dismissed from service is not entitled for encashment of unutilized leaves - Service Law--Leave Encashment--Employee who has been dismissed from service is not entitled for encashment of unutilized leaves--Punjab Civil Services (as applicable to Haryana) Rules, Rule 8.21--Haryana Civil Services Rules, 2016, Rule 65.

JUDGMENT :

HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J.

1. In the present writ petition, the challenge is to the letter dated 11.02.2016/26.02.2016 (Annexure P-3) whereby, in reply to the legal notice served by the petitioner claiming the benefit of leave encashment has been declined on the ground that the petitioner was convicted by the competent Court of law on the charges involving moral turpitude in the case titled CBI vs. Vidhya Dhar etc. and in pursuance to the said conviction, petitioner was dismissed from service vide order dated 21.03.2013 and was relieved w.e.f. 05.04.2013 and therefore, an employee, who has been dismissed from service on the charges involving moral turpitude, is not entitled for the grant of leave encashment.

2. As per the facts mentioned in the writ petition, petitioner was employed as a Block Education Officer in the Department of Education Haryana. Petitioner was convicted in the infamous JBT scam, which was enquired into by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CC No. 37 of 2010), under the Prevention of Courruption Act, 1988. The said conviction is still maintained against the petitioner even as of now as the same has already been upheld upto the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. Petitioner has already undergone the sentence.

3. Keeping in view the conviction of the petitioner in a criminal case which also included the charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, the respondent-Department dismissed the petitioner from service as the charges on which the petitioner was convicted, involved moral turpitude.

4. As the dismissal of the petitioner from service has also attained finality, the petitioner served upon the respondents a legal notice on 28.01.2016 (Annexure P-1). In the said legal notice, the demand of the petitioner was for the release of the leave encashment alongwith interest @ 18%. The said request of the petitioner was rejected by the respondents while replying to the legal notice vide letter dated 11/26.02.2016. In the said letter, the respondents informed the counsel who served legal notice on behalf of the petitioner that keeping in view the fact that the petitioner was dismissed from service, as per the instructions issued by the Department of Finance, Government of Haryana dated 12.08.1998, no leave encashment can be extended in favour of the petitioner, who is a dismissed employee. In the present writ petition, the said communication dated 11.02.2016-26.02.2016 is under challenge.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner very fairly states that he has not been able to find any rule which grants an employee, the benefit of leave encashment, prior to his/her retirement or to a dismissed employee but argues that there is also no rule, which prohibits the grant of the same as well. In the alternative, learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the dismissal of the petitioner from service will only amount to termination of his services and therefore, even otherwise, the case of the petitioner is covered for the grant of benefit of leave encashment under the instructions, which have been issued by the Government of Haryana from time to time especially the instructions dated 12.08.1998. Further, a reliance has been placed by the counsel for the petitioner in support of his prayer for the grant of leave encashment on a decision rendered by this Court in CWP No. 27383 of 2013 titled as Dhir Chand vs. State of Haryana and Others, decided on 19.11.2018. Counsel for the petitioner argues that by the said order, it has been held by a Coordinate Bench of this Court while examining the question of the grant of leave encashment to an employee who has been dismissed from service, that an employee, though dismissed from service, will be entitled for cash value of the leaves available for encashment on the day when the employee employer relationship end.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the ca