JUDGMENT 1. - The petitioner, who joined the services in a College established and managed by the respondent No. 3, a Non- Government Educational Institution and who retired on 31.12.2001 from the post of Principal, has filed this writ petition stating the grievance against non-payment of the amount of leave encashment. 2. It is submitted that the respondent No. 3 is receiving aid from the State Government under the provisions of the Rajasthan Non- Government Educational Institutions Act, 1989 ('the Act of 1989') and the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions (Recognition, Grand-in-Aid and Service Conditions etc.) Rules, 1993 ('the Rules of 1993'). It is further submitted that in terms of Section 29 of the Act of 1989, the employees of the Non- Government Educational Institutions are entitled to the same scales of pay and allowances to which the staff belonging to the similar categories in the Government Institutions are entitled to; and that includes leave encashment allowance too. The petitioner served a notice seeking payment towards leave encashment on 02.02.2005 (Annex. 1) that was replied by the respondent No. 3 on 21.02.2005 (Annex. 2) in the manner that the release of the amount of leave encashment would depend on the instructions of the State Government. 3. The petitioner submits that though the State Government proceeded to issue a circular dated 05.04.2007 stating that the leave encashment would be admissible w.e.f. 19.12.2005 but such a proposition remains contrary to the provisions of the Act of 1989 and the declaration of law by this Court in the case of S.R. Higher Secondary School & Ors. v. Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Tribunal, Jaipur & Ors. : 2002 (5) WLN 3 . 4. The respondent No. 3 has filed a reply to the writ petition relying on the said circular issued by the Government and with the submissions that the circular has validly been issued under Section 29 of the Act of 1989 and Rule 34 of the Rules of 1993 which is applicable to the institutions receiving aid from the Government; and, according to the respondent No.3, when the Government has stopped the encashment of earned leave from 1998, the circular dated 05.04.2007 cannot be said to be without authority of law. 5. The issue at hand does not appear open for further dispute and debate in view of the consistent decisions of this Court. 5. The issue at hand does not appear open for further dispute and debate in view of the consistent decisions of this Court. In S.R. Higher Secondary School (supra), the Larger Bench of this Court has held that the employees of the Non-Government Educational Institutions receiving grant-in-aid under the Rules of 1993 are entitled to the selections grade as admissible to the employees of the State Government. The Larger Bench has further held that leave encashment is an allowance and the teachers of Non- Government Educational Institutions are entitled to claim the same allowance at parity with the teachers of Government Educational Institutions. 6. Further, in the batch of petitions led by CWP No. 2473/2006: Mahila Mandal v. The State of Rajasthan & Ors., decided on 25.10.2007 , a co-ordinate Bench of this Court considered the prayer made by the respective Non-Government Educational Institutions for directions against the Government for release of salary, dearness allowance, selections grades and leave encashment as paid/payable to the employees; and has allowed the writ petitions directing the respondents to accord approval and to release the grant-in-aid to the petitioner-institutions in respect of the said items of payment to the employees. It is also pointed that the intra-court appeals taken against the order dated 25.10.2007 have since been dismissed. 7. Thus and in view of the above, the circular dated 05.04.2007 could only be considered redundant and in any case cannot be countenanced so far it runs contrary to the law declared by this Court. As a necessary consequence, this writ petition deserves to be allowed with necessary directions to the respondent No. 3 for making payment of the arrears of leave encashment to the petitioner; and to the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 for releasing grantin- aid to the respondent No. 3 in that regard. 8. A reasonable provision for payment of interest also deserves to be made in favour of the petitioner as she has unnecessarily been deprived of her legitimate dues.. This Court is of opinion that the petitioner ought to be allowed interest @ 12% per annum on the arrears from the date of filing this writ petition, i.e., 17.05.2007. 9. 8. A reasonable provision for payment of interest also deserves to be made in favour of the petitioner as she has unnecessarily been deprived of her legitimate dues.. This Court is of opinion that the petitioner ought to be allowed interest @ 12% per annum on the arrears from the date of filing this writ petition, i.e., 17.05.2007. 9. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed with the following directions:- (1) Within 60 days from today, the respondent No.3 shall make payment of the amount towards leave encashment to the petitioner alongwith interest @ 12% per annum from 17.05.2007 until the date of payment. (2) The respondents Nos. 1 and 2 shall grant approval and release the grant-in-aid to the respondent No. 3 in regard to the amount of leave encashment payable under this order within 60 days from the date of the respondent No. 3 submitting its claim in accordance with the provisions of Rules of 1993 and the applicable decisions. No costs.Petition allowed. *******