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) 509

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
Vishal Dhagat, J.
Pyare Lal Rawal – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 17841 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 can be withheld during pending departmental or judicial proceedings because the right to leave credit ceases upon dismissal or removal under Rule 8 of the Civil Services (Leave) Rules, and no provision exists for the grant of provisional leave encashment.

Headnote:(A) Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 - Rule 64; Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1977 - Rules 8, 25, 36 - Withholding of leave encashment during pending proceedings - Rule 64 of Pension Rules provides for the payment of provisional pension and 50% of gratuity during the pendency of departmental or judicial proceedings, but does not specifically provide for the withholding of leave encashment - Leave encashment is not a government due but a salary for the period of leave to which a government servant is entitled. (Paras 7, 8)

(B) Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1977 - Rule 8 - Effect of dismissal, removal or resignation on leave at credit - Any claim to leave to the credit of a government servant ceases from the date of dismissal, removal or resignation - Since judicial proceedings or departmental enquiries may result in termination or dismissal from service, the right to leave encashment ceases under the conditions mentioned in Rule 8 - In the absence of any enabling provision for "provisional leave encashment" in the Leave Rules, such benefits can only be granted once proceedings have attained finality. (Paras 9, 10, 12)

Facts of the case:
A government servant's request for leave encashment was rejected by the state government on the grounds that the individual had been convicted under sections relating to fraud and corruption, and judicial proceedings were still pending. The petitioner challenged this order, contending that there is no specific legal provision that disentitles a government servant from encashing leave during the pendency of a criminal case.

Findings of Court:
The court found that while the Pension Rules only address the adjustment of provisional pension and gratuity, the Leave Rules explicitly state that leave credits cease upon dismissal or removal. Since pending proceedings may lead to such a result, and there is no provision for provisional leave encashment, the employee must await the final outcome of the proceedings.

Issues: Whether the 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.

Ratio Decidendi: The right to leave encashment is subject to the conditions of Rule 8 of the Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1977, where the claim ceases upon dismissal or removal. Because pending judicial or departmental proceedings can result in termination or dismissal, and unlike pension and gratuity, no provision for "provisional" leave encashment exists, the benefit cannot be paid until the proceedings are finalized.

Result: Writ Petition is dismissed.

Legal Category Hierarchy

  • crime and sentencing
    • offences under indian penal code
      • cheating (Para 1)
      • criminal conspiracy (Para 1)
    • offences under prevention of corruption act
      • corruption (Para 1)
  • administrative law
    • civil services
      • leave rules
      • pension rules
        • provisional pension (Para 7)
  • constitutional law
    • writ jurisdiction
      • article 226 (Para 1)

Table of Contents

1. Challenge to rejection of leave encashment on ground of pending criminal proceedings under IPC and PC Act. (Para 1 )

2. Petitioner argued no provision allows withholding leave encashment; respondent argued Rule 64(1)(c) authorizes withholding. (Para 2 , 3 )

3. Writ Petition dismissed; no provisional leave encashment can be granted pending proceedings. (Para 12 , 13 )

4. Is leave encashment a government due that can be withheld under Rule 64(1)(c) of the Pension Rules?

No, leave encashment is salary, not a government due, and Rule 64 does not provide for withholding it. (Para 8 )

5. Can leave encashment be paid during pendency of proceedings that may lead to dismissal?

No, because Rule 8 of the Leave Rules provides that claim to leave ceases on dismissal, removal, or resignation, and pending proceedings may result in such termination. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 )

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

No, the Leave Rules do not provide for provisional leave encashment; employee must await final outcome. (Para 12 )

ORDER :

Vishal Dhagat, J.

Petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India challenging order dated 11/11/2021 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 420, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 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 remo

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