JUDGMENT : Heard counsels for the parties. 2. The Present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 21.07.2008, whereby the leave encashment demanded by the petitioner, has been denied on the ground of resignation. 3. From the pleading and arguments, it appears that the petitioner has been appointed under the respondents in executive cadre on 09.11.1978. The petitioner has tendered resignation as per the company rules dated 23.04.2008 giving three months’ notice. 4. As per resignation letter, the date of quitting from the service has been tendered as 22.07.2008. On serving the notice of resignation, the petitioner has been transferred on the same day dated 23.04.2008 to the Headquarter. It appears that the petitioner has requested to the authorities regarding the legal position whether the petitioner is entitled to encash the unavailed leave or not, and further, request has been made for grant of leave so that he can utilise his leave before retirement. The request of the petitioner has been turned down by the authorities on the ground of pendency of departmental proceedings. 5. Ultimately, on culmination of the departmental proceedings the letter of resignation has been accepted by the respondents with effect from 23.07.2008 and the said acceptance has been communicated to the petitioner vide letter dated 29.07.2008. Thereafter, the petitioner has also made several representations for release of the half pay leave as accumulated in the account of the petitioner. 6. The relevant fact and document which is necessary for deciding the dispute between the parties, is the letter dated 11.07.2008 submitted by the petitioner whereby in clear terms petitioner has asked for encashment of accumulated half pay leave as per the rules. Before that, the petitioner vide letter dated 06.06.2008 has asked the company that whether he is entitled for the leave encashment or not. The same query has been negated by the respondents vide letter dated 21.07.2008, whereby it has been communicated that the petitioner is not entitled for any leave encashment as per Clause 7.1 of the leave encashment scheme as he has resigned. 7. It appears that thereafter the petitioner has attempted for utilising the leave and for this request has been made. The request of the petitioner has been turned down on the ground of pendency of the departmental proceedings. 8. 7. It appears that thereafter the petitioner has attempted for utilising the leave and for this request has been made. The request of the petitioner has been turned down on the ground of pendency of the departmental proceedings. 8. Thus the claim has been raised by the petitioner, hat on the one hand has been denied from availing the leave before quitting the service and on the other hand the encashment has also been denied. 9. A detail counter affidavit has been filed whereby the factual aspect has not been disputed. So far legal position is concerned rules applicable in the field is quoted hereinbelow:- COAL INDIA LIMITED “Coal Bhawan” 10-Netaji Subhas Road, Culcutta-700001 Cll : C:5A (vi) : 52056 (Vol. ii)/192 Dated : 15-12-1994 OFFICE ORDER 1. The Board of Directors CIL in their 142nd Meeting held on 17th October, 1994 at New Delhi accorded its approval to the encashment of Half-Pay Leave subject to a maximum of 240 days of Half-Pay Leave at the credit of the executive cadre employees w.e.f. 01.04.1993 on the following conditions:- (i) On separation from the Company on attaining age of superannuation; (ii) Death while in service; (iii) Permanent total disablement of an executive; (iv) On Voluntary Retirement before the date of superannuation but after attaining the age of 55 years; (v) In case on cessation of service after attaining the ago of 50 years or more provided the executive cadre employee; has put in a minimum of 20 years’ continuous service as a regular employee if the Company and the cessation is not as a result of disciplinary action or leave the service without approval of the management. (I) Other conditions, governing the encashment of Half-Pay Leave, will be the same as are in the case of Earned Leave encashment. (II) Suitable amendment will be carried out in the Leave Encashment Scheme for Executive Cadre Employees separately.” R.A.P . SINGH Director (Personnel & IR) For the purpose of comparison the 12.5.1 of 2010 Rules is also quoted hereinbelow:- “12.5.1. (II) Suitable amendment will be carried out in the Leave Encashment Scheme for Executive Cadre Employees separately.” R.A.P . SINGH Director (Personnel & IR) For the purpose of comparison the 12.5.1 of 2010 Rules is also quoted hereinbelow:- “12.5.1. Encashment of half pay leave subject to maximum of 300 days of HPL at the credit of the executive is permissible on the following conditions: (a) On separation from the company on attaining the age of superannuation; (b) Death while in service; (c) Permanent total disablement of an executive; (d) On voluntary retirement before the date of superannuation but after attaining the age of 55 years; (e) In case of cessation of service after attaining the age of 50 years or more provided the executive has put in a minimum of 20 years continuous service as a regular executive in the company and the cessation is not as a result of disciplinary act on or leaving the service without approval of the Management.” Counsel for the petitioner has also relied upon the above rules along with chapter 7.0 of the leave encashment scheme (For Executive Cadre Employees) as annexed as Annexure-A to the counter affidavit dated 14.01.2011, which is quoted hereinbelow:- “7.0 ENCASHMENT OF LEAVE ON TERMINATION OF SERVICE/RETIREMENT 7.1 Leave at credit shall not be granted for encahment if an employee resigns from the service. Note : According to Para 7.1 of the Leave Encashment Scheme for Executive Scheme for Executive Cadre Employees, leave at credit shall not be granted for encashment if an employee resigns from the service. A question in this connection has been raised as to whether “resigns from the service” would mean that date on which the resignation has been submitted or the date on which the resignation is effective i.e. the date of final quitting of service. A question in this connection has been raised as to whether “resigns from the service” would mean that date on which the resignation has been submitted or the date on which the resignation is effective i.e. the date of final quitting of service. The matter was examined in consultation with Finance and it is clarified that since there is no restriction on granting of leave to an employee during the period prior to the date of his actual quitting of/release from service on submission of resignation, the words “resigns from service” would mean the actual date of quitting of service and hence the facility of encashment of leave may, if allowed be available before and upto that date and not beyond the date of actual quitting of the service.” (Authority : CIL OM No. C-5(B)/52056/182, DATED 12/15.6.1978) Referring to the above rules and the scheme, it has been submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is entitled for encashing the half pay leave till the date of quitting the service. In the present case the date of quitting from the service is 22.07.2008 and as such the petitioner could have made application till 22.07.2008 and in fact it has been made but which has wrongly been denied. Counsel for the petitioner has also relied upon the un-reported judgment of the Bombay High Court in the case of Omprakash Vs. Coal India Ltd. & Ors. which has been disposed of on 13.07.2012. Para-23 has been relied upon which is quoted hereinbelow:- “23. Once the above view is taken, we are of the opinion that the petition succeeds only in part. The petitioner is entitled to the encashment of half pay leave in terms of the 2010 Rules and he must be granted the benefit thereof because those Rules do not deprive him of the said benefit on resignation but grant it by relying on minimal service of 20 continuous years, as a regular executive in the company. The petitioner’s cessation of service is not a result of disciplinary action or leaving the service without approval of the management. Since the petitioner has ceased to be in service because of the resignation, which is approved, and is not subject to any disciplinary action, then, the petition deserves to be allowed, in so far as the claim for encashment of half pay leave is concerned. Since the petitioner has ceased to be in service because of the resignation, which is approved, and is not subject to any disciplinary action, then, the petition deserves to be allowed, in so far as the claim for encashment of half pay leave is concerned. As a result of the above discussions, Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (iii), but to the extent of 293 wp888.12 days half pay leave, which sum is computed by the petitioner at Rs. 6,74,280/- Since the petitioner has ceased to be in service of the respondents w.e.f. 01.05.2011, the petitioner will be entitled to half pay leave as computed vide Annexure-IX from this date till the date of payment. The said amount will carry interest @ 8% p.a. from 01.05.2011 till its actual payment.” On the other hand, counsel for the respondents has disputed the claim of the petitioner and has submitted that the petitioner has made an application for availing the leave but it has been rightly been refused as against the petitioner departmental proceeding was going on. The petitioner had sought permission for going abroad that has been denied. So far as encashment is also concerned that is not permissible as the petitioner had resigned from the service. Heard counsels for the parties. It is admitted position that the petitioner has tendered his resigned on 23.04.2008 indicating the date of quitting from the service as 22.07.2008. The same was permissible under the law and has been accepted by the respondents. Thus, the petitioner has quitted the service by resignation with effect from 22.07.2008. The application for encashment of half leave has been made before the date of quitting from the service. This fact is also not in dispute, as in counter affidavit it has been admitted by saying that it is a matter of record. The date of quitting from the service has been defined in the Clause 7.1 of the scheme annexed with the counter affidavit. The words used in the scheme “resigns from service” would mean the actual date of quitting of the service and hence the facility of encashment of leave may, if allowed be availed and up to that date and not beyond the date of actual quitting of the service. Thus the wording of the scheme is clear that the date of quitting is actual date of cessation from the service. Thus the wording of the scheme is clear that the date of quitting is actual date of cessation from the service. The facility of encashment of half leave is available till that date. So far as condition for grant of half pay leave is concerned. The petitioner is covered under Clause 5 of the above rules. As per the above rules if the petitioner has completed 20 years of continuous service and resignation is after completion of 50 years then he is entitled for half pay leave. Admittedly in the present case, the petitioner has completed 20 years of continuous service and before quitting from the service he has completed 50 years of his service. This issue has been settled by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court as indicated above. The Bombay High Court is of the view that if the entitlement of the person have to be seem in accordance with the rules. In the present case as discussed above, as per rule the petitioner is entitled for encashment for half pay leave. In view of above discussion, the impugned order dated 21.07.2008 is, hereby, quashed. It is held that the petitioner is entitled for half pay leave accumulated in his credited. Maximum 240 days is allowed, this factual aspect will be considered by the authorities and as per rules the same will be released to the petitioner within ten weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. With the above observation and direction, the present writ petition stands disposed of.