Ajay Rastogi, J. - (1.) INSTANT petition has been filed by petitioner assailing order of Non -Government Educational Tribunal dated 22nd February, 1999 whereby it was directed that respondent who served the institution on his retirement was entitled for encashment towards earned leave in terms of Rule 47 read with Rule 51(1) of Rules, 1993.
(2.) RESPONDENT No. 1 K.R. Sharma who joined service as Teacher on 7th July,1964 and retired from service on 31st July, 1993. Much before his retirement, Act of 1989 came into force w.e.f. 1st January, 1993 and rules framed thereunder also given effect to w.e.f.1st April, 1993. There is no period of limitation provided under Section 21 of the Act, 1989 for employees/teachers to file application before Tribunal for release of their retiral dues to which they became entitled for under the provisions of the Act, 1989. Respondent No. 1 filed application under Section 21 of the Act, 1989 and made his limited grievance that under Rule 51 he is entitled for payment of encashment of leave which has not been made admissible to him by petitioner to which he is entitled for under the rules in question. Learned Tribunal after adjudication of the dispute and taking note of Rule 51, which has been extensively quoted in the order impugned, directed petitioner to make payment of encashment of leave to respondent under order dated 22nd February, 1999.
(3.) IT appears that pending petition respondent No. 1 has expired and his legal heirs with the permission of court were brought on record. So far as deceased teacher is concerned, despite there was order of Tribunal in his favour, he was deprived of fruits for which he became entitled for during his life time.;