Supreme Court modifies leave entitlement for subordinate staff, aligning with statutory provisions

The Supreme Court upheld the Tribunal's decision affirming the continuous practice of encashment of privilege leave since 1948. However, the Court modified the award to align with statutory provisions, limiting sick and casual leave entitlement to 12 days per year for subordinate staff. The Court found no justification for discrimination in leave entitlement between clerical and subordinate staff, allowing 30 days of privilege leave for the latter as directed by the Tribunal.

---

---

Issues:
1. Departure from past practice in encashment of privilege leave
2. Granting leave facilities to subordinate staff on par with other staff members

Analysis:
1. The dispute arose regarding the departure from past practice by the Management in encashment of privilege leave. The workers claimed that the company had been allowing encashment of privilege leave since 1948, which became a part of the terms of service. The company argued that encashment was permitted only under specific circumstances as per Rule 45. The Tribunal found in favor of the workers, stating that the practice of encashment had been continuous since 1948 for various purposes. The Supreme Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, noting the evidence presented, including witness testimony and historical data, supporting the workers' claim.

2. The second issue involved granting leave facilities to subordinate staff on par with clerical staff. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the workers, stating that there was no justification for discrimination in leave entitlement between clerical and subordinate staff. However, the Supreme Court analyzed the relevant provisions of the Delhi Shops and Establishments Act, 1954, which set out minimum entitlements for privilege, sick, and casual leave. While the Act prescribed a minimum of 15 days for privilege leave, the Tribunal had directed 30 days of privilege leave for subordinate staff, which the Supreme Court found acceptable. However, the Tribunal's direction to grant sick and casual leave exceeding the statutory maximum of 12 days was deemed illegal by the Supreme Court. Consequently, the Court modified the Tribunal's award, allowing 30 days of privilege leave but limiting sick and casual leave to the statutory maximum of 12 days per year.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court upheld the Tribunal's decision regarding the continuous practice of encashment of privilege leave since 1948 but modified the award to align with statutory provisions by limiting sick and casual leave entitlement to 12 days per year for the subordinate staff.

---