Sangeeta S. Dhaygude v. State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission Through Its Registrar And ORS

Shailaja

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.19111 OF 2024 Sangeeta S. Dhaygude ] Petitioner versus State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission ] Maharashtra through Its Registrar and others ] Respondents .....

Mr. Ajit Jaywant Kenjale, for Petitioner.

Ms. T.J. Kapre, A.G.P, for Respondents - State. .....

CORAM : M.S. KARNIK & SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, JJ DATE : 22nd AUGUST, 2025.

P.C:

1.

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner.

2.

The petitioner prays for a direction to respondents No.1 to 4 to admit and grant Leave Encashment to the petitioner and pay the amount together with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of completion of tenure within stipulated period.

3.

The petitioner was working as "President" of District Consumer Forum. The petitioner successfully completed her tenure as appointment was first for period of five years. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the

petitioner that the President of District Forum is entitled to encashment of unutilized leaves during her tenure of the service, however, respondents did not pay the same. It is submitted that this Court in case of Chandrakant B. Pandharpatte and others Vs. State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission and others in Writ Petition No.9868 of 2014 decided on 11th September, 2015 has held that the petitioners therein who were identically placed were entitled to the benefit of leave encashment of the earned leaves. This Court had directed the State Government to release the benefit of leave encashment to the petitioner within a period of three months.

4.

The learned A.G.P made an attempt to oppose the petition. It is submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to grant of leave encashment. 5.

However, we find that the controversy in the present case is squarely covered by the decisions of this Court in following cases; (i) Chandrakant B. Pandharpatte and others Vs. State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission and others in Writ Petition No.9868 of 2014;

(ii) Pranali Sawant and others Vs. State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission and others, Writ Petition [Stamp] No.27125 of 2016; (iii) Shashikala Shashikant Patil and another Vs. State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission and others, Writ Petition No.1438 of 2023.

6.

In this view of the matter, we have no hesitation in allowing the present Writ Petition despite opposition of the learned A.G.P. Accordingly, we direct respondents No.1 to 4 to admit and grant leave encashment to the petitioner and pay the amount within a period of three months from the date of communication of the order. Upon failure to release the amount within a period of three months, the same will carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of this petition till the payment of requisite amounts. 7.

The petition is disposed of on above terms with no order as to costs. [SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH. J.] [M.S. KARNIK, J.]