'Constitutional And Fundamental Right Of An Employee To Receive Retiral Benefits, If There Are No Legal Impediments': Jharkhand High Court

The Jharkhand High Court has ruled that pensionary benefits are a constitutional and fundamental right of employees, not a discretionary bounty of authorities. The Court expressed bewilderment at the withholding of retiral benefits from an employee whose dismissal order had been quashed by the appellate authority without any appeal or revision from the Department.

Justice SN Pathak presiding over the case, remarked, “This Court fails to understand that under which authority of law, the entire admitted retiral benefits of an employee can be withheld when the order of dismissal has been quashed and set aside by the appellate authority, that too when no appeal / revision has been preferred by the Department. The respondents are taking flimsy stand, which is not acceptable to this Court. This is yet another glaring example of delay and laches on the part of the respondents for not extending the retiral benefits.”

The case involved a retired Assistant Teacher who sought a directive for the payment of his full pensionary benefits, including pension, gratuity, GPF, GIS, leave encashment, and salary minus subsistence allowance. The petitioner had been dismissed from service through a memo, a decision later overturned by the appellate authority. Despite this, the petitioner had to seek judicial intervention as the benefits linked to his retirement were not granted.

“Even the admitted dues have not been paid to the employee who retired on 31.1.2023 itself. Almost a year has passed. The poor employee is being harassed at the hands of the respondents. This Court, in plethora of judgments, has held that the pensionary benefits are not the bounty to be distributed at the sweet-will of the Authorities. It is the Constitutional and fundamental right of an employee to receive the retiral benefits, if there are no legal impediment. Nothing has been brought on record to show that either a criminal case or a departmental proceeding was pending against the petitioner,” Justice Pathak added.

Justice Pathak also remarked that due to the lethargic and lackadaisical approach of the respondents, the petitioner was subjected to hardship and had suffered a monetary loss which made the respondents liable to pay interest on the due amount at an appropriate rate to compensate the petitioner.

The petitioner argued that he had been wrongfully dismissed from service through a memo, a decision that was later overturned by the appellate authority. Despite this, the Petitioner was compelled to seek judicial intervention because the benefits linked to his acknowledged retirement, such as full pay during the suspension period and full pay from the date of the dismissal order to the retirement date, were not granted.

On the other hand, the State argued that the retiral benefits could not be granted as no decision had yet been made regarding their disbursement.

The Court directed the respondents to pay all retiral benefits including pension with interest at the rate of 6% per annum simple interest on the delayed payment of retiral benefits including the consequential benefits which were supposed to be paid upon quashing of the dismissal order by the appellate authority, from the date of entitlement till the date of the actual payment.

“It is made clear that if the amount is not paid within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the same shall carry interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of amount fallen due to the petitioner till date of actual payment,” the Court clarified while allowing the writ petition.

Case Title: Shrawan Kumar Das V. The State of Jharkhand

LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 88

Click Here To Download Judgement