BANGALORE: Karnataka High Court has held that a person who has not worked and not earned leave, cannot claim leave encashment.
“First, he should work, earn leave, should not avail the same and then seek encashment of such leave earned. When he has not worked and not earned leave, the question of granting him leave encashment would not arise,” a division bench headed by Justice N Kumar observed while setting aside the orders passed by a single-judge bench as well as a labour court in favour of a conductor ofBangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation(BMTC).
“The employee would be entitled to only those benefits which is expressly granted. A direction to reinstate with continuity of service, in the absence of express words denying consequential benefit cannot be construed as granting the benefit of consequential benefit. It is also settled law, that when a party approaches a court, seeks several reliefs and the courts grant some and do not say anything about the remaining reliefs, it is presumed that the said reliefs are denied,” the bench further observed.
The BMTC had challenged the August 9, 2011 verdict of the single-bench asking it to grant leave encashment to one G V Thimmappa, now 64, who worked as a conductor with the corporation. The single-judge bench had declined to interfere with the order passed by the labour court.
Thimmappa’s service was terminated on August 3, 1994 for unauthorizedly remaining absent from January 22,1994. He raised an industrial dispute by moving the labour court. The labour court held that the termination was not preceded by any inquiry and the same was vitiated. It asked the management to reinstate him. Since this order was not challenged it became final.
However, after this Thimmappa filed an application seeking Rs 1,71,127 as consequential benefit. This was challenged by the management and the labour court held that the workman was not entitled to that amount. However, it ruled that Thimmappa is justified in asking for leave encashment.
Category: CAT Judgements