Latifur Rahman vs G.H.A.D.C.

This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to forthwith release the amount of gratuity and leave salary to the petitioner sanctioned by respondent No.4 with a further prayer to make payment of interest at the current market rate from the date of entitlement till the date of actual payment.

The petitioner claims that he was appointed to the post of Village Council Secretary of Phulbari village, Rural Development Branch of Garo Hills Autonomous District Council vide appointment order dated 29.09.1973 and retired on 28.02.2014 on attaining the age of superannuation and was released from service w.e.f. the same date.

The respondent No.4 sanctioned a sum of Rs. 9,43,500/- as gratuity which was payable to the petitioner on account of the services rendered by him at the time of superannuation besides an amount of Rs. 3,14,500/-for leave salary. The respondent No.4 failed to release the said payment which necessitated the petitioner to approach this Court seeking release of the amount of gratuity and leave salary along with interest for the delayed period by the respondent No.4.

Upon notice being issued, affidavit-in-opposition has been filed. It has been stated that an amount of gratuity and leave salary has been released on 28.11.2017 vide cheque No.950830. Para 10 of the affidavit reads thus:-

"10. That in reply to the statement made in paragraph 13, 14, 15 and 16 the answering respondent begs to state that the gratuity of the Petitioner could not be released as per the sanction order by the Executive Committee, GHADC due to acute financial crunch of GHADC, and there was no indifference attitude on the part of the answering respondent to release the retire benefits of the Petitioner, the delay in payment of dues to the Petitioner is not with a view to harass him but due to shortage of fund and for the same the Petitioner cannot claim interest upon it. The Executive Committee has inherited empty coffers and lot of debts in respect of payment of dues/retirement benefits to its retired employees. In this respect the Respondents are sincerely working out for payment of retirement's benefits to all its retired employees without any partiality. The GHADC is clearing the due of the retired employees serially on the basis of seniority and in the case of the Petitioner vide Cheque No.950830 dated 28-11-2017 an amount of Rs.12,58,000/- was paid to him as full and final payment of leave salary and Gratuity."

In view of the above, the claim of the petitioner for release of gratuity and leave salary stands satisfied.

However, learned counsel for the petitioner relying upon the order of this Court passed in WA No.34 of 2017 [Azranath M. Momin v. G.H.A.D.C & ors] decided on 18.03.2019 submitted that the defence taken by the respondents for release of gratuity and leave salary belatedly is that they were not averse to the payment of gratuity and leave salary but due to its bad financial health, payment got delayed and interest may not be awarded. However, similar plea was considered by the Division Bench of this Court in Azranath M. Momin's case (supra) where the respondents had claimed waiver of interest due to weak financial health of the respondents. However, the Division Bench instead of awarding prevalent market rate of interest, awarded simple interest at the rate of 6% per annum, from the date the amount of gratuity and leave salary had become due, till it was released in favour of the petitioner.

Accordingly, in the light of the Division Bench dictum in Azranath M. Momin's case (supra) decided on 18.03.2019, I direct that the petitioner shall be entitled to interest @ 6% per annum on the amount of gratuity and leave salary for the delayed period and the amount of interest shall be accordingly worked out and paid to the petitioner within a period of four weeks.

In view of the above, writ petition stands disposed of.