SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(MP) 505

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
Vishal Dhagat, J.
Piyush Shrivastava – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 19003 of 2022
Decided On : 16-03-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Shri Om Shankar Pandey, Advocate
For the Respondent:Ms. Supriya Singh, Govt. Advocate

Leave encashment cannot be granted provisionally during pending departmental or judicial proceedings because the right to leave credit ceases upon dismissal or removal. Since such proceedings may result in termination, payment is deferred until the proceedings reach finality.

Headnote:(A) M.P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 - Rule 64(1)(c) and Rule 60; M.P. Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1977 - Rule 8, 25, and 36 - Withholding of leave encashment during pendency of judicial or departmental proceedings - Rule 64 of the Pension Rules pertains to provisional pension and gratuity and does not specifically provide for the withholding of leave encashment - Earned leave is considered salary for the period of leave and does not fall within the definition of ascertainable government dues, thus leave encashment cannot be withheld solely in aid of Rule 64(1)(c) of the Pension Rules. (Para 8)

(B) M.P. Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1977 - Rule 8 - Effect of dismissal, removal or resignation - Any claim to leave to the credit of a government servant ceases from the date of dismissal, removal, or resignation (Para 6, 9) - If judicial or departmental proceedings are pending which may result in termination, dismissal, or removal from service, the right to leave encashment may cease to exist; therefore, such benefits can only be granted after the proceedings have attained finality. (Para 10, 11)

(C) Provisional Leave Encashment - There are no enabling provisions under the M.P. Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1977, for granting provisional leave encashment during the pendency of departmental enquiry or criminal proceedings; in the absence of such provisions, the employee must await the final outcome of the proceedings. (Para 12)

Facts of the case:
A government servant's request for leave encashment was rejected on the grounds of conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The authority relied on the rules regarding the withholding of retiral benefits during the pendency of proceedings. The petitioner challenged the order, contending that no specific provision exists to withhold leave encashment and citing previous judicial precedents to support the claim for release of the amount.

Findings of Court:
The court held that while leave encashment is not a government due that can be withheld under the Pension Rules, the Leave Rules explicitly state that the right to leave credit ceases upon dismissal or removal. Since pending judicial or departmental proceedings carry the possibility of termination or removal, the right to encashment is contingent upon the final outcome of such proceedings.

Issues: Whether the state government is at liberty to withhold leave encashment if departmental or judicial proceedings against an employee are pending.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that under Rule 8 of the M.P. Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1977, the right to leave encashment terminates upon dismissal or removal from service. Because departmental or judicial proceedings may lead to such termination, and since the rules provide no mechanism for "provisional leave encashment," the payment cannot be made until the proceedings achieve finality.

Result: Writ Petition is dismissed.

Legal Category Hierarchy

  • service law
    • civil services
      • leave rules
        • earned leave encashment (Para 6, 8, 9, 10, 12)
        • effect of dismissal, removal or resignation (Para 9, 10)
      • pension rules
        • provisional pension and gratuity (Para 7, 8)
  • crime and sentencing
    • corruption
      • prevention of corruption act, 1988 (Para 1)

Table of Contents

1. Petitioner's leave encashment rejected due to conviction under Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. (Para 1 )

2. Petitioner argued no provision for withholding leave encashment; respondent relied on Rule 64(1)(c) of Pension Rules. (Para 2 , 3 )

3. Petition dismissed; leave encashment cannot be paid during pendency of judicial proceedings under Rule 8 of Leave Rules. (Para 13 )

4. Can leave encashment be withheld under Rule 64(1)(c) of the M.P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 during pendency of judicial proceedings?

No; earned leave encashment is salary, not a government due, and Rule 64(1)(c) only addresses adjustment of pension and gratuity. (Para 8 )

5. What is the effect of Rule 8 of the M.P. Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1977 on leave encashment when disciplinary or judicial proceedings are pending?

Claim to leave ceases on dismissal, removal, or resignation; since proceedings may lead to termination, leave encashment cannot be paid until finality. (Para 9 , 10 )

6. Is there any provision for provisional leave encashment during pendency of departmental or criminal proceedings?

No enabling provision exists; unlike provisional pension and gratuity under Rule 64 of Pension Rules, no provisional leave encashment can be granted. (Para 12 )

ORDER :

Vishal Dhagat, J.

Petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India challenging order dated 3/10/2018 contained in Annexure P-1. By said order prayer of petitioner for encashment of earned leave was rejected on ground that he was convicted under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Prayer for encashment of earned leave was rejected in aid with Rule 64 (1)(c) of M.P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 on grounds that payment is to be made on conclusion of proceedings. Final retiral benefits are to be paid after adjustment of provisional pension gratuity paid under Rule 64 (1)(c) of M.P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 on conclusion of proceedings. Proceedings include departmental enquiry or judicial proceedings.

2. Counsel appearing for petitioner submitted that respondents had committed an error in passing impugned order and same is not in consonance with law. There is no specific provision which aids withholding of leave encashment of petitioner. In Writ Appeal No.772/2019 (Sevaram Khandegar Vs. State of M.P. & Others) Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 04/02/2019 held that there is no provision, which disentitles petitioner during pendency of criminal case from encashing leave in his account. Writ Appeal filed was allowed and respondents were directed to release 50% of gratuity as directed by learned Single Judge as well as amount which is in account of petitioner under leave encashment head. In support of his contention counsel also placed reliance on orders passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.18341/2023 (Badelal Pathak Vs. State of M.P. & Others) decided on 05/09/2023 and also order dated 10/02/2023 passed in Writ Petition No.17844/2020 (Bhuvansingh Waskel Vs. State of M.P. & Others). In view of aforesaid, counsel for petitioner prays for quashing of impugned order and allowing Writ Petition.

3. Counsel appearing for respondents submitted that leave encashment was rejected placing reliance on Rule 64 (1)(c) of M.P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976, which authorises withholding of pensionary benefit during pendency of judicial proceedings. There is no illegality in the order. If petitioner is finally acquitted, shall be adjusted against final retiral benefits. In view of same, Writ Petition be dismissed.

4. Heard counsel for the parties.

5. Question before this Court is whether State Government is at liberty to withhold leave encashment if departmental proceeding or judicial proceeding against an employee is pending in aid of Section 64(1)(c) of Civil Services Pension Rules, 1976.

6. A Government servant under Rule 25(1)(a) of M.P. Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1977 shall be entitled to 30 days earned leave in every calendar year. Every Government servant has a leave account, which is prepared in accordance with Rule 14 of aforesaid Rules. Leave of every Government servant is credited into leave account in two installments of 15 days each on first January and first July every year. As per Rule 25(1)(c) of M.P. Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1977 maximum earned leave credited into account shall not exceed limit of 300 days. Maximum earned leave which can be granted to Government servant under Rule 25(2) of M.P. Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1977 is 120 days. As per Rule 36 of M.P. Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1977 Government servant who proceeds on earned leave is entitled to leave salary equivalent to the pay drawn immediately before proceeding on earned leave. Rule 36 of M.P. Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1977 further lays down that on retirement or resignation of a Government servant, it is to be seen whether he has availed more leave then permissible to him and in such cases adjustment shall be made in respect of leave salary if leave is overdrawn. As per Rule 8 of M.P. Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1977 any claim to leave to credit of a Government servant, who is dismissed or removed or resigned from Government service, ceases

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top