#paymentofgratuityact1972

[seemabhatnagar]

"Delay and denial of retirement benefit is condemning the retired employee to penury and impecuniosity’s”

After retirement receiving gratuity is not the normal expectation of the retired employee. Exorbitant Delay and denial of Gratuity is same as subjecting the retired employee to penury & impecuniosity's.

The petitioner in the present matter was not paid Gratuity as such was subjected to approach Controlling Authority. The authority determined Gratuity as Rs.4,09,550/- with Simple Interest @10% from 30.09.2007 till it is paid and State was directed if the Gratuity amount is not paid within 30 days the same be recovered as arrear of land revenue. The order was passed on 31.05.2012.

Even than Gratuity was not paid on the ground that an WP relating to regularization of service of the petitioner is pending. Whereas, theWrit Petition had nothing to do with the payment of Gratuity to the Petitioner.

Petitioner than approached High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench in the year 2014 and his Writ Petition was allowed with stringent directions on 09.08.2023 to the Respondent Ministry of Health & Family Welfare (Union of India) & Health & Family Welfare Department (The State of Karnataka).

Amidst legal battle petitioner has attained the age of 74 years and this delay is not normal delay but culpable delay clearly showing callousness of the State towards its employees whose voice become feeble with progression of time.

Imagine the plight of the employee for getting his legible statutorily retiral benefit amounting to Rs.4,09,550/- petitioner had to fought a legal battle for over 2 decades. He has gone through mental and financial turmoil.

Babu v. Union of India & 4 Others

WP 111248/2014

Before Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka at Dharwad

W P Allowed on 09.08.2023 by Hon’ble Mr. Justice M Nagaprassana

 Background

1.     The petitioner joins the service at Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College on 01.12.1973, as First Division Clerk at the Postpartum Centre attached to the Jawarharlal Nehru Medical College, Belgaum & retired on 31.08.2007 on attaining the age of superannuation.

2.     The petitioner served the College for 34 years and is now 74 years. After retirement Gratuity was have to be paid to the petitioner within a month.

3.     But it was not paid to the petitioner on the ground that a dispute with regard to his service is pending adjudication in another Writ Petition No.26349/2004.

4.     Non-Payment of gratuity led the petitioner to file an application before Controlling Authority under Payment of Gratuity Act for determining gratuity and direction for its payment.

5.     Controlling Authority determined Gratuity at Rs.4,09,550/- & issued direction for disbursement of gratuity with 10% Simple Interest from 30.09.2007 till the date of its payment and in the absence of payment the State was directed to recover the gratuity as arrears of Land.

6.     But neither the gratuity was paid nor it was recovered as arrear of land revenue.

Observation of the Court

1.     11 years have passed by, pursuant to the directions issued by the Controlling Authority for payment of gratuity and 16 years have passed by with the petitioner attaining the age of superannuation.

2.     It is not delay alone, but culpable delay on the part of the respondent in not paying the amount of gratuity that the petitioner was at all time entitled to.

3.     It is trite that the gratuity is not a bounty that can be withheld at the sweet will or whim of the employer, Secretary of Health and Family Welfare, Government of Karnataka.

4.     Non-Payment of gratuity by the State shows the apathy of the Government towards its retired employees whose voices have become feeble by progression of age and therefore the State does not hear such voices.

5.     Insensitivity of the State is displayed not for a year or two but near to 2 decades by denying terminal benefit to an employee who is entitled to it as retirement benefit.

6.     Nothing goes of the State if it doesn’t pay terminal benefit to its employees but if an employee whose retirement is dependent on the receipt of the terminal benefit of which gratuity is one is denied he would be condemned to penury and is driven to impecuniosity’s having no money to fall back upon at the advanced old age.

7.     The employee is still fighting to get gratuity which he was supposed to get within one month from 31.01.2007.

Direction of the Court

1.     The petitioner is entitled for the Writ of Mandamus directing respondent for immediate disbursal of the gratuity to the petitioner along with interest.

2.     In the event, the petitioner would not be paid gratuity within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, the petitioner would become entitled to penalty apart from interest @ 10% per annum at the rate of Rs.1,000/- for every day, day on day; month on month, till the gratuity amount reaches the petitioner.

 Seema Bhatnagar