Leave Policy Dispute Resolution

Providing a draft judgment for a complex legal case is quite detailed, but I can provide some general insights based on the information given:
*. Advance Sick Leave:
- Employee's Argument: Leave was duly approved and applied in good faith.
- Employer's Argument: Not permissible for old employees, hence recovery initiated after 4 years.
- Legal Insight: Retroactive cancellation after such a long period could be challenged under principles of natural justice. The case of Punjab vs. Rafiq Masih may support the employee, as undue hardship for recovery after a significant delay is generally discouraged by courts.
*. Half CL:
- Employee's Argument: Leave type was approved multiple times over 2 years, and HRMS system allowed for such leave.
- Employer's Argument: Not permissible as per policy, thus recovery initiated.
- Legal Insight: Since the system allowed and the competent authority approved it repeatedly, the employee acted in good faith. The retrospective recovery may be deemed unfair.
*. Absence During Lockdown:
- Employee's Argument: Lockdown was an extraordinary situation, leave was approved, and he was deputedbased on that approval.
- Employer's Argument: No special leave for lockdown absence, hence leave conversion to LWP.
- Legal Insight: Exceptional circumstances like a government-imposed lockdown may warrant special consideration. The employer's actions might be seen as unreasonable considering the unprecedented situation.