The withholding of leave encashment is justified under Rule 39(3) of Leave Rules, 1972 when disciplinary proceedings indicate potential recoverable amounts from the employee.

ORDER

PER:- AJAY PRATAP SINGH, MEMBER [JUDICIAL]

1. Heard learned counsel for parties through video conferencing mode.

2. Grievance of the applicant in present OA is only to the extent that a direction be issued to the respondents to release his withheld amount of leave encashment after superannuation with penal interest.

PRAYER

3. By way of present Original Application filed under Section 19 of Administrative Tribunals Act 1985, applicant has sought the main relief (as extracted from OA) as under:-

“8(i) Your Lordships may graciously be pleased to quash the order of SSRM PT.Dn Patna under O/o SSRM PT.Dn No.Pen/K.G.Prasad/Retd.SA/PT.Dn dated 26.07.2022 (Annexure A/4).

8(ii) That your Lordship may graciously be pleased to direct the respondents to pay for unutilized earned Patna leave credited to the leave account of the applicant after his superannuation from service on 31.03.2022 with panel interest.

8(iii) Any other relief or reliefs including cost of the case may be allowed in favour of the applicant.”

FACTS IN BRIEF

3. Briefly stated facts as adumbrated by applicant in instant OA are that applicant at the time of initial engagement as full time casual labour on 01.12.1983 in Transit Mail Office (TMO), Pakur of RMS P.Dn., Patna, was non-matric. Applicant joined as Mail Man, now designated as M.T.S., after implementation of 6^th CPC on 01.04.21992 in RMS P.Dn. after passing literacy test. Applicant succeeded in LDCE for the post of Sorting Assistant and joined as Sorting Assistant on 27.05.21997 in the then office of SRO, RMS, P-Dn Jasidih and retired on superannuation from SRO RMS, PT-Dn, Bhagapur on 31.03.2022 treating his date of birth as 15.03.1962.

4. Applicant was ill from 14.01.2022 till his retirement and respondents have granted leave to applicant for that period and leave salary was also paid. Subsequently, SSRM, PT-Dn. issued order for payment of provisional pension to applicant under O/o SSRM PT.Dn, Patna vide Memo No.04 (Pen/K.G. Prasad/Retd.SA/PT-Dn.) dated 04.04.2022 (Annexure A-2) in accordance with sub-rule 4 of Rule 64 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 [hereinafter referred to as Rules, 1972]. The respondents did not pay leave encashment to the applicant after superannuation as per rules, he represented to SSRM, PT.Dn, Patna on 16.07.2022 (AnnexureA-3) to pay him the leave encashment.

5. Respondents informed the applicant vide impugned order dated 26.07.2022 that his encashment of leave is withheld under sub-rule 3 of Rules 39 of CCS (Leave) Rules, 1972.

6. It is the case of the applicant that he was served with a charge sheet dated 03.03.3022 under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 [hereinafter referred to as Rules, 1965] which was served on Patna 07.04.2022, i.e., after his retirement. It is also the case of the applicant that the chargesheet is not related to his date of birth and not for any defalcation of money. The applicant was engaged as Casual labour and he was not appointed on the strength of matric certificate and his date of birth was recorded as 15.03.1962 in service book and the respondents have accepted the same and permitted him to retire from service on 31.03.2022. Applicant also stated that respondents have released encashment of leave in same Division in case of Shailendra Kumar Mishra and Amar Nath Prasad and did not withheld their DCRG on the ground of facing judicial proceeding. Hence, applicant is also entitled to receive leave encashment.

7. In support of his claim, learned counsel appearing for applicant has relied upon decisions of this Tribunal in identical matters titled as Rajeshwar Paswan versus Union of India & Ors. [OA No.313/2012 decided on 04.08.2014], Bibhash Chandra Singh versus