Esheria India Case Law
Sign in
India Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

India Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
0 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter India case law

Results update automatically as you type.

India decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Service law

ASHOK KUMAR DABAS (DEAD THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS) versus DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION

Because the deceased employee resigned on 07.08.2014 and the resignation was accepted on 19.09.2014 and the withdrawal was not permitted, Rule 26 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 causes forfeiture of past service and he is not entitled to pension; however, since the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 applies (no exemption under Section 5), the legal heirs are entitled to gratuity and to leave encashment, and the amounts due must be paid with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of resignation until payment.

Source excerpt

  • Resignation
  • Leave encashment
  • Gratuity
  • Pension
  • Payment of gratuity
  • Forfeiture of past service
Read case analysis
Service law

STATE OF SIKKIM AND OTHERS versus DR. MOOL RAJ KOTWAL

Under Rule 36 a regular government servant who retires under the Sikkim Government Service Rules, 1974 is entitled to leave encashment up to a maximum of 300 days on the date of retirement, and a re-employed retired servant cannot claim a second leave encashment for leave earned during re-employment beyond that 300-day limit; Rule 32 does not revive Rule 36 entitlement afresh.

Source excerpt

  • Leave encashment
  • Re-employment
  • Superannuation
  • Interpretation of rules
  • Natural justice
Read case analysis
Service law

JAGDISH PRASAD SAINI & ORS. versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

The term 'salary' under the Act includes leave encashment; Rule 5(viii) of the 2010 Rules which bars carry forward of privilege leave and forces employees to seek encashment only from aided institutions is arbitrary and unenforceable; accordingly the State and the aided institution management are liable to pay leave encashment in the ratio of the grant (70% by State and 30% by management), and the management is liable to pay gratuity to the appellants under the 1993 Rules.

Source excerpt

  • Leave encashment
  • Gratuity
  • Absorption of aided employees
  • Grant-in-aid
  • Interpretation of service rules
  • Arbitrariness of contractual conditions
Read case analysis
Service law

K. ANBAZHAGAN & ANR. versus THE REGISTRAR GENERAL HIGH COURT OF MADRAS & ANR.

Appellants, though appointed on ad-hoc/tenure basis as Additional District and Sessions Judges (Fast Track Courts) from the Bar, were part of the judicial establishment, not appointed on contract, and received pay and service conditions equivalent to regular judges. Having completed more than ten years of qualifying service and being on 'pensionable establishment', they are entitled to pension, gratuity, and leave encashment under the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978 and Tamil Nadu Leave Rules, 1933. The High Court was in error in dismissing their claim for pension and other retiral benefits.

Source excerpt

  • Judicial service
  • Pension
  • Retiral benefits
  • Ad-hoc appointment
  • Tenure appointment
  • Leave encashment
Read case analysis
Service law

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS versus NOWROSJEE WADIA COLLEGE AND OTHERS

Although university statutes entitle teachers of affiliated colleges to leave encashment, neither the 1974 Act nor the 1994 Act obligates the State Government to reimburse the affiliated colleges. University/College cannot claim reimbursement from the State as of right merely because university statute provides for the benefit.

Source excerpt

  • Leave encashment
  • University statutes
  • Reimbursement of leave encashment
  • Government directives to universities
Read case analysis
Service law

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

Lecturers/Demonstrators in aided private colleges affiliated to universities are entitled to earned leave and encashment of such leave on retirement as per Statutes 424(3) and 424(C) of University of Pune, as these statutes continue in force under Section 115(2)(xii) of the Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994 unless modified or superseded, and are not affected by government directives; Rule 54 does not apply as respondents are not government servants.

Source excerpt

  • Earned leave
  • Leave encashment
  • Retirement benefits
  • Educational institution employment
  • Statute interpretation
Read case analysis
Labour law

MANIPAL ACADEMY OF HIGHER EDUCATION versus PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER

Amount received by encashing earned leave is not a part of 'basic wage' under Section 2(b) of the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 and does not require pro rata employer's contribution.

Source excerpt

  • Employees' provident fund and miscellaneous provisions act, 1952
  • Definition of basic wage
  • Leave encashment
  • Employer's contribution
  • Beneficial legislation
Read case analysis
Service law

PUNJAB AND SIND BANK AND ORS. versus MOHINDER PAL SINGH AND ORS.

Since the applicant withdrew his offer before acceptance and had no knowledge that any amount paid was part of the Scheme, he did not waive his right to continue in service. The mere deposit of a small leave encashment amount without communication or knowledge cannot be treated as a waiver or acceptance of benefits under the Scheme. The applicant is entitled to reinstatement with all consequential benefits and service continuity, except for any period of leave.

Source excerpt

  • Voluntary retirement scheme
  • Waiver of rights
  • Leave encashment
  • Reinstatement in service
  • Constitution of india article 12
Read case analysis
Service law

UNION OF INDIA versus JUSTICE (RETD.) S. N. SAXENA AND ORS.

Retired High Court Judges, irrespective of prior encashment as judicial officers, are entitled to leave encashment at retirement based on Rules and Constitution, and any discriminatory denial of such benefits is invalid.

Source excerpt

  • Leave encashment
  • Retirement benefits
  • Judges’ service conditions
  • Discrimination under article 14
Read case analysis
Income tax

BHARAT EARTH MOVERS versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KARNATAKA

Provision made by the appellant company for meeting the liability incurred under the leave encashment scheme, proportionate with entitlement earned by employees and subject to the ceiling on accumulation as applicable, is entitled to deduction; such liability is not contingent but accrued in the relevant accounting year.

Source excerpt

  • Deduction
  • Contingent liability
  • Business expenditure
  • Mercantile system of accounting
  • Leave encashment
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

India decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.