-1- Civil Writ Petition No.1927 of 2004. IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ... Date of Decision: May 29, 2008. Smt. Vinod Bala ... Petitioner VERSUS Managing Committee, D.A.V. Colleges, Chitra Gupta Road, New Delhi through its Director and another... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL. 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? Present: Mr. Subhash Ahuja, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Nirmaljit Kaur, Advocate, for respondent No.1. -.- MOHINDER PAL, J. The Managing Committee, D.A.V Colleges, New Delhi – respondent No.1 (hereinafter referred to as the respondent- Management) runs a large number of schools in the country. The petitioner got appointment as a Social Studies Mistress in August, 1970 in Arya Girls High School, Amritsar, which is a recognized school and getting grant-in-aid from the Punjab -2- Civil Writ Petition No.1927 of 2004. Government. Because of untimely death of her husband in the year 1977, the petitioner requested the respondent- Management for her transfer from Amritsar. Thereafter, on her request, she was adjusted as a Principal in the D.A.V. Public School, Naraingarh (Ambala) in the year 1986 pursuant to which she was relieved of her duties on March 04, 1986. Thereafter, in the year 1987, she was transferred as Principal to Anil Kumar D.A.V.Public School, Ismailabad (Kurukshetra). In the year 1991, she was transferred as Principal, D.A.V. Public School, Shahbad Markanda. The petitioner retired as a Principal from the service of the respondent-Management on November 30, 2000. She was paid her retiral benefits except the leave encashment. It is the case of the petitioner that she is entitled to this benefit. She has given instances of Mr.R.K. Jindal and Mr.P.K. Sharma, who, according to the petitioner, were similarly situated as the petitioner and were extended the benefit of leave encashment, but the petitioner was denied the same. It has been pleaded that all employees being controlled by the same Managing Committee are entitled to identical benefits of service. According to the respondent-Management, the petitioner is not entitled to leave encashment as per the rules. Three following conditions are required to be satisfied before an employee is held eligible for leave encashment:- “ (a) the employee should have worked in an affiliated school; (b) the affiliated school should be D.A.V. Public or Model School not receiving -3- Civil Writ Petition No.1927 of 2004. grant-in-aid; ( c ) the school in which the employee has worked should have the provision of leave encashment i.e the school should have a provision in the budget for leave encashment @ 3% of the basic pay + D.A and send it every month to the leave encashment fund maintained by D.A.V. Colleges Managing Committee New Delhi.” The respondent-Management has pleaded that the petitioner has not worked in any D.A.V. Public/Model School, nor in a school where there was provision of leave encashment. It has been further pleaded that the rules of leave encashment, as applicable to the employees of D.A.V. Public Schools/ Model Schools, were prepared by the Sub Committee and approved by the D.A.V. Colleges Managing Committee, as is clear from the Annexures R-1 and R-2. The case of the petitioner is not covered under the Scheme. So far as the cases of Mr. R.K. Jindal and Mr.P.K. Sharma, who were extended the benefit of leave encashment, is concerned, it has been pleaded that both of them were extended this benefit for having rendered their services in affiliated schools, which were also D.A.V.Public Schools and provisions of leave encashment were available there. As such, their cases were duly covered under the Scheme. The petitioner is not eligible for leave encashment because she has not served in any affiliated or recognized Public/Model School. The only question to be answered in this writ petition is - whether case of the petitioner for leave encashment is -4- Civil Writ Petition No.1927 of 2004. covered under the the Rules of Leave Encashment as prepared by the Sub Committee in its meeting held on December 02, 2000 (Annexure R-1) and approved by the D.A.V. Colleges Managing Committee vide Resolution No.83 dated December 24, 2000 (Annexure R-2). The Rules which were recommended by the Sub Committee and adopted by the D.A.V. Colleges Managing Committee are as under:- “ 1. Employees of the D.A.V. Public/Model Schools affiliated to C.B.S.E. Or State Education Boards or recognized by the Directorate of Education, Delhi shall be eligible for leave encashment from the date of affiliation or recognition. 2. To become eligible for Leave Encashment, the confirmed employee must complete 5 years of continuous service in eligible D.A.V Public/Model School. 3. An employee eligible for Leave Encashment if transferred to a school not eligible for Leave Encashment shall continue to be entitled for Leave Encashment. 4. En employee working in a school not falling in clause 1, if transferred to School having leave encashment provision, shall be entitled for Leave Encashment from the date he joins that school. 5. xx xx xx. 6. xx xx xx. -5- Civil Writ Petition No.1927 of 2004. 7. xx xx xx. 8. xx xx xx. 9. xx xx xx.” According to the above-quoted Rules, an employee, for being eligible for leave encashment, must be a confirmed employee for complete five years on the establishment of D.A.V Public/Model School affiliated to C.B.S.E or State Education Boards or recognized by the Directorate of Education, Delhi. These Rules further provide that if an employee eligible to Leave Encashment is transferred to a school not eligible for Leave Encashment, shall continue to be entitled for leave establishment. Further, if an employee working in a school not eligible for Leave Encashment is transferred to a School having Leave Encashment provision, shall be entitled for Leave Encashment from the date he joins that school. The petitioner did not serve in any affiliated or recognized Public/Model School. The petitioner served in Arya Girls High School, Amritsar from August 13, 1970 to March 04, 1986, which is not a Public or Model School. Thereafter, the petitioner served in the following unaffiliated schools:- 1. D.A.V. P.S. Naraingarh from March 05, 1986 to March 06, 1987; 2. A.K.D.A.V. P.S. Ismailabad from March 07, 1987 to January 22, 1991; 3. D.A.V.P.S, Shahbad Markanda from January 23, 1991 to November 30, 2000. It has been stated in the written statement that as -6- Civil Writ Petition No.1927 of 2004. per D.A.V. Colleges Managing Committee Norms, unaffiliated schools do not contribute to leave encashment. In the replication filed by the petitioner to the written statement of respondent-Management, it has no where been stated that she ever worked in any affiliated or recognized Public/Model School which may entitle her for leave encashment as per the Rules of Leave Encashment drafted on December 02, 2000 vide Annexure R-1 by the Sub Committee and approved vide Resolution No.83 dated December 24, 2000 (Annexure R-2) by the D.A.V. Colleges Managing Committee. To press her claim, the petitioner in her replication stated that the respondent-Management cannot be allowed to discriminate between its employees on an artificial classification of Model/Public or Non-affiliated schools especially when they have no option to serve in a particular school of their choice after having been appointed in a particular school. This plea of the petitioner is not tenable. Firstly, when she got her initial appointment in Arya Girls High School, Amritsar, she knew that there was no provision of leave encashment in that school; meaning thereby she knew the status of the school. Secondly, as stated in the legal notice dated March 28, 2003 (Annexure P-4) served by the petitioner upon the respondent- Management, when she was serving in Arya Girls High School, Amritsar, she made representation to the General Secretary, D.A.V. Colleges Managing Committee, New Delhi, praying that her case may be considered for appointment to the post of Principal. She was called for interview. She was offered appointment to the post of Principal and was transferred from Amritsar to D.A.V. Public School, Naraingarh, vide relieving order dated -7- Civil Writ Petition No.1927 of 2004. March 04, 1986 (Annexure P-1). Thus, she again got promotion and posting as Principal on her own request to a school which was an unaffiliated school not contributing to Leave Encashment. The petitioner, thus, having got appointment on promotion to a school knowing fully well that the same was an unaffiliated school not contributing to leave encashment, was governed by the Rules as applicable to the school of her appointment by choice. If the petitioner had sought appointment/promotion in a recognized Public School, her terms of appointment could not be changed to her disadvantage if she would have been transferred to an unrecognized school lateron. Again Anil Kumar D.A.V. Public School, Ismailabad and D.A.V. Public School, Shahbad Markanda, where the petitioner was later on transferred, were unaffiliated schools not contributing to leave encashment. The respondent-Management acted under the Rules in declining the case of the petitioner for Leave Encashment. We do not find any ground for interference in exercise of writ jurisdiction of this Court. Consequently, this writ petition is dismissed being without any merit. ( HEMANT GUPTA ) ( MOHINDER PAL ) JUDGE JUDGE May 29, 2008. ak