Pramath Patnaik, J. - Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are retired teachers of Minority Primary/Middle School, details of the individual
are being shown in the chart given below :
Sl. No. Name of TeacherName of Circle Date of Date of Retirement
School appointment
1. Patras Dang R.C. Boys Jaldega 17.8.1978 31.5.2008
Middle School,
Kuturgia,
Simdega
2. Barous Xaxa Sahayta Prapt Simdega 10.7.1985 30.11.2010
Primary
School,
Katasaru,
Simdega
3. It is the contention of the petitioners that the schools in question are Aided Minority Schools and all expenses towards payment of salary and
retirement benefits of the school employees is funded by the State Government from the public exchequer. The petitioners are also getting pension
on the basis of the pension payment order issued by the office of the Accountant General.
4. In the present writ application, the grievance of the petitioners is in relation to non-payment of leave encashment amount on the earned leave
outstanding against them. They have also stated that other post retrial dues have already been paid and that salary and post-retirement benefit have
been paid out of grant-in-aid provided by the State Government.
5. Mr. Kripa Shankar Nanda, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though, the claim of the petitioners was resisted earlier by the
respondent-State Government, but the issue has now been: settled in view of the judgment rendered by the learned Division Bench of this Court in
the case of Mariyam Tirkey v. The State of Jharkhand and others in 2014 (2) JCR 182 (Jhr) : W.P. (S) No. 506 of 2013 and analogous
cases dated 3rd January, 2014 which has also been reported in 2014 (1) JBCJ 465 and now upheld up to the Hon''ble Supreme Court vide
judgment dated 15.12.2014 passed in Social Leave to Appeal (C) No(s) 20606-20607/2014. According to the petitioners the writ petition may
be disposed of in View of the judgment rendered as aforesaid by the learned Division Bench and affirmed up to the Hon''ble Supreme Court, by
directing the respondents to pay the earned leave encashment amount to the petitioner.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State does not dispute that the aforesaid issued relating to admissibility of the earned leave
encashment amount to the teachers of non-Government/Aided Minority School has now been decided by the judgment rendered in the case of
Mariyam Tirkey (supra) and affirmed up to the Hon''ble Supreme Court.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, in such circumstances, the writ petition is being disposed of by directing the respondent Nos. 2 and
3, to take a decision in the matter of grant of leave encashment amount to the petitioners after due scrutiny of their relevant service records and in
view of the judgment rendered in the case of Mariyam Tirkey (supra) within a period of ten weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order
along with the representation on behalf of the petitioners.
8. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.