KHANDESH COLLEGE EDUCATION SOCIETY, JALGAON &ANR. versus ARJUN HARI NARKHEDE & ORS.

Citation: [2011] 7 S.C.R. 175 · Decided: 05-07-2011 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R.V. RAVEENDRAN · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

[2011] 7 S.C.R. 175 
KHANDESH COLLEGE EDUCATION SOCIETY, JALGAON 
A 
&ANR. 
v. 
ARJUN HARi NARKHEDE & ORS. 
(SLP (C) Nos. 17039-17040 of 2008) 
JULY 05, 2011 
B 
[R.V. RAVEENDRAN AND A.K. PATNAIK, JJ.] 
Service law - Earned leave - Encashment of unutilized 
earned leave on retirement - Lecturers/Demonstrators were C 
working in Vacation Department of a private College 
established by petitioners-College Education Society -
Entitlement for earned leave and for encashment of unutilized 
earned leave on their retirement -
Held: The lecturers/ 
demonstrators were entitled to earned leave and encashment 
D 
of earned leave as per the provisions of Statutes 424(3) and 
424(C) - Though State Government had issued directives 
from time to time to the Universities to amend the Statutes 
so as to ensure that lecturers or teachers working in Vacation 
Department were disentitled to earned leave and encashment 
E 
of earned leave, but Statutes 424(3) and 424(C) which entitled 
the said teachers to earned leave and encashment of earned 
leave, were not modified or superseded - Also no provisions 
in the Act to the effect that Statutes of a University which are 
inconsistent with the directives of the State Government would 
F 
be invalid - Section 115(2) (xii) rather states that Statutes 
which are not inconsistent with the provisions of the Act and 
which have not been modified or superseded shall continue 
to be in force - University of Pune Statutes - Statutes 424(3) 
and 424(C) - Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994 - s. 115(2) 
G 
(xii). 
Respondent nos.1 to 14 were working as Lecturers/ 
Demonstrators in a College established by petitioners-
College Education Society, which was receiving aid from 
175 
. 
H 
176 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2011] 7 S.C.R. 
A the State. The respondents were not granted encashment 
of their unutilized leave on their retirement despite their 
demands. Respondent Nos. 1 to 14 made a 
representation to the Grievances Committee of the North 
Maharashtra University, to which the petitioner-College 
B Society was affiliated, that under Statute 424(3) and 
Statute 424(C) of the University of Pune they were 
entitled for encashment of earned leave after retirement 
but the Committee did not take any action on their 
representation. The respondents filed a Writ Petition. The 
c High Court directed the Grievances Committee of the 
University to dispose of the representation. Pursuant 
thereto, the Grievances Committee of the University 
decided that respondent Nos 1 to 14 were entitled to 
encashment of their earned leave to their credit under 
0 Statute 424(C) read with $tatute 424(3) of the University 
of Pune and communic,,,ated the same to the college. 
Thereafter, the petitioner-College Society filed a writ 
petition challenging the decision of the Grievances 
Committee of the University as well as the constitutional 
E validity of Statutes 424(3) and 424(C) of the University of 
Pune while respondent Nos.1 to 14 filed a cross writ 
petition seeking a direction to the University to direct the 
petitioner-College Society as well as the Principal of the 
College to pay their unutilized earned leave with interest 
and cost. The High Court held that the constitutional 
F validity of Statutes 424(3) and 424(C) of the University of 
Pune cannot be challenged; that respondents were 
entitled to leave in accordance with their service 
conditions; and that the College after discharging its 
liability.of payment of leave encashment WOllld be entitled 
G to claim reimbursement by way of grant from the State 
of Maharashtra subject to the claim of the College being 
admissible under law. Therefore, the petitioners filed the 
instant Special Leave Petitions. 
H 
Disposing of the Special Leave Petitions, the Court 
KHANDESH COLLEGE EDUCATION SOCIETY, JALGAON 177 
v. ARJUN HA~I NARKHEDE 
HELD: 1.1 From the very language of different A 
provisions of Rule 54 of the Maharashtra Civil Services 
(Leave) Rules, 1981 it is clear that it applies only to 'a 
Government servant'. Respondent nos.1 to 14 are not 
Government servants and, therefore, cannot be denied 
earned leave on the basis of provisions made in Rule 54 
B 
of the 1981 Rules. [Para 6) [185-A-B] 
1.2 Section 115 of the Maharashtra Universities Act, 
1994 while repealing the different Acts applicable to 
different universities in the State of Maharashtra provides 
C 
in sub-section (2)(xii) that all Statutes made under the 
repealed Acts in respect of any existin

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.