1 caw3031.09 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3031 OF 2009 In WRIT PETITION NO.1369 OF 2008 State of Maharashtra & Anr. : Applicants (Orig. Respondents) V/s. Dr.A.R.Vaidya & Ors. : Respondents .... WITH C.A.NO.3032 OF 2009 IN W.P. NO.777/2008, C.A. NO.3033/2009 IN W.P. NO.1370/2008, C.A. NO.3034/2009 IN W.P. NO.2264/2008, C.A. NO.3035/2009 IN W.P. NO.1667/2008, C.A. NO.3036/2009 IN W.P. NO. 1368/2008, C.A. NO.3037/2009 IN W.P. NO.1666/2008, C.A. NO. 3038/2009 IN W.P. NO.1672/2008, C.A. NO.3039/2009 IN W.P. NO. 1371/2008, C.A. NO.3042/2009 IN W.P. NO.2383/2008, C.A. NO. 3045/2009 IN W.P. NO.8945/2007, C.A. NO.3047/2009 IN W.P. NO. 8763/2007 & C.A. NO.3048/2009 IN W.P. NO.8775/2007. ... Mr.Nitin Deshpande, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for the applicants. Mr.Girish Kulkarni with Ms Swati Deshmukh i/b. Ms M.G.Kulkarni for respondent nos.1 & 2. Ms Kiran Kandpile for original petitioners. Ms Anjali Helekar for resp. nos.4 & 5 in C.A. Nos.3032/2009, 3034/2009, & 3045/2009. Ms Meena Doshi for respondent nos.4 & 5 in C.A. Nos.3031/09, 3033/09, 3035/09 to 3039/09, 3042/09, 3047/09 & 3048/09. ... 2 caw3031.09 CORAM : A.M. KHANWILKAR AND MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,JJ. DATE : MAY 03, 2011. P.C.: The State has filed all these Civil Applications for clarification of the order dated 7.4.2008 passed in disposed of Writ Petitions filed by the respondents-teachers. These Applications have been filed pursuant to the observations made by the apex Court in its order dated 3.11.2009 in S.L.P. (Civil) Nos.27286 – 27287 of 2009 filed against the judgement and order passed by this Court dated 24.8.2009 in C.A. No.2320 of 2009 and Writ Petition No.6609 of 2009. 2. The limited clarification sought by the applicant-State is that at the end of the last sentence of paragraph 4, the following words be added:- “only if admissible under the law.” 3. The Applications are resisted by the respondents-teachers (original petitioners) on the argument that such clarification would completely change the nature of the relief granted to the writ petitioners. According to them, the direction issued by the Court in its order dated 7.4.2008 is a 3 caw3031.09 peremptory order requiring the respondent-State to reimburse the leave encashment amount paid by the management to its teachers. 4. On the other hand, the applicants have relied on the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court dated 20.6.2008 in Writ Petition No. 2881 of 2007 and companion cases wherein it has been clarified that the liability of the State would be subject to the claim of the management being admissible under the law. 5. In our opinion, the clarification sought by the applicant-State of Maharashtra is a benign clarification. Inasmuch as, the respondents (original writ petitioners) or the management of the school in which the teachers were employed and have been paid leave encashment amount, cannot be heard to contend that the management would be entitled for reimbursement of the amount so paid by them even if the same is inadmissible in law. In other words, the directions contained in the order dated 7.4.2008 will have to be understood to mean that the management would be entitled to claim reimbursement by way of grant from the respondent-State to the extent of the amount paid by it to the teachers as leave encashment, if permissible in law. 4 caw3031.09 6. In this view of the matter, we allow all these Civil Applications by adding at the end of paragraph 4, the following words:- “if permissible in law.” 7. We, however, record the submission of the management as well as the teachers (original writ petitioners) with approval that the fact that such clarification has been issued does not necessarily mean that the management is not entitled for reimbursement in law. That is a matter which will have to be examined in appropriate proceedings as and when occasion arises. 8. Applications disposed of accordingly. (A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.) (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.)