2025:JHHC:29735 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 1861 of 2021 ------ 1. Krishna Bihari Prasad, son of late Jai Govind Prasad, resident of Milan Studio, Darjee Mohalla, P.O and P.S. Giridih, District- Giridih, Jharkhand. 2. Arbind Kumar, son of late Ram Padarath Panday, resident of Daruara, Nur Sarai, Kundi, P.O Daruara, P.S Nur Sarai, District Nalanda, Bihar. 3. Vinay tiwari, son of late Dev Chand Tiwari, resident of near Gol Ghar, P.O GPO, P.S. Patna, Bihar. 4. Anuj Devi, wife of late Kush Lal Pashwan, resident of village- Bhandaridih, P.O Chetardih, P.S. Giridih, Jharkhand. … Petitioner(s) -Versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Principal Secretary, Department of School Education and Literacy, Govt. of Jharkhand, Project Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi. 3. The Director, Secondary Education, Department of School Education and Literacy, Govt. of Jharkhand, , Project Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi. 4. The District Education Officer, Giridih. ... Respondent(s) ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the petitioner(s): Mr. Abhijeet Kr. Singh, Advocate For the State: Mrs. Varsha Ramsisaria, AC to GP-V. ------ 11/24.09.2025: Heard the parties. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for a direction upon the respondents to add their un-utilized leave while they were working as Clerk in Adult Education Scheme in calculating the leave encashment. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were employed in Adult Education Scheme and after closure of the said scheme, they were given fresh appointment in School Education and Literacy Department, Govt. of Jharkhand. He further submits that the petitioners have already superannuated but their leave encashment was calculated on the basis of un-utilized leave in the Department of School Education and Literacy Department. He also submits that the grievance of the petitioners is that un-utilized leave accrued during the period when they were in Adult Education Scheme was not considered. 4. Learned counsel for the State submits that a decision has been taken, which is at Annexure-(C) to the Supplementary Counter Affidavit. By referring the last paragraph of the said decision/circular, she submits that the decision has been taken to club the un-utilized leave for the period which the petitioners have worked in the Adult Education Scheme. 2. 5. Considering the aforesaid submission and Annexure-(C) of the Supplementary Counter Affidavit, it appears that a decision has already been taken in favour of the petitioners. 6. Since the decision has already been taken in favour of the petitioners, I direct the respondent authorities to pay balance amount of leave encashment to the petitioners if the same has not already been paid, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of. 24th September, 2025 Anu/-Cp2. (ANANDA SEN, J.)