Mudit Kumar And Others vs H.P.T.D.C

Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J

Since common questions of law arise for consideration in all these petitions, therefore, they are taken up together and are being disposed of by a common judgment.

The instant petitions have been filed for grant of the following substantive reliefs:­

“i) That a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or directions may kindly be issued directing the respondents to release the revised higher amount of gratuity and leave encashment in favour of the petitioner in terms of the Revised Pay Rules as well as the Payment of Gratuity (Amendment) Act, 2018, alongwith interest @ 9% p.a.

ii) That a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or directions may kindly be issued directing the Respondents to release the arrears on account of the delayed payment alongwith interest @ 9% p.a.”

The respondent has filed its reply, wherein it has not denied the entitlement of the petitioner(s) to the reliefs, as sought for, and the only ground taken for not granting the benefit to the petitioner(s) is contained in para­4 of the reply, which reads as under:

“That the petitioner is entitled to the higher amount of gratuity as per payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 amended on 29.3.2018 by the Govt. of India, published in the Gazettee of India (Annexure R­2). But the petitioner despite of being entitled cannot be granted the financial benefit exceeding the limit of Rs. 10,00,000/­ because of the fact that the competent authority of the Respondent corporation i.e. Board of Directors (BOD) in its meeting held on 29.11.2019 vide agenda item No. 154.7 that due to poor financial health of the HPTDC the item agenda has been deferred till the resources of the corporation allow to bear the expenditure (Annexure R­3). Hence, the financial benefits exceeding the capping of Rs. 10,00,000/­ as per payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 amended on 29.3.2018 referred above can be given to the petitioner along with other similarly situated retirees only in case the same will be approved by the competent authority i.e. Board of Directors (BOD) of the respondent corporation as per availability of funds in future. It is further submitted that respondent corporation is a semi Govt. commercial organization where, the benefits like revised pay scale from time to time at par with the Govt. Departments are being released to the eligible employees of the HPTDC, only after the prior approval of the competent authority i.e. Board of Directors. It is pertinent to mention here that, the matter with respect of revised pay scale was placed before the Board of Directors of HPTDC, in its meeting held on 5.9.2022 for granting of above benefits to the eligible employees of the Respondent corporation. It is, also submitted that as & when the Board of Directors of the Respondent Corporation approves the adoption of revised pay scale effective from 1.1.2016 onward at par with the Himachal Pradesh Govt. Departments in HPTDC, the balance amount of Leave encashment, if any as per these pay scales will be calculated and released to the petitioner as per availabilities of the funds.”

Once the respondent accedes to the entitlement and eligibility of the petitioner(s) for grant of relief of revised gratuity, obviously, the mere fact that the same could not be placed before the competent authority, i.e. the Board of Directors, can be no ground to deny such benefit to the petitioner(s).

Accordingly, we deem it proper to dispose of these petitions by directing the respondent to release the revised higher amount of gratuity and leave encashment, in favour of the petitioner(s), in terms of the Revised Pay Rules as well as Payment of Gratuity (Amendment) Act, 2018, within a period of three months from today, failing which the respondent shall be liable to pay interest @ 9% per annum, from the date of filing of the petition, till its realization in favour of the petitioner(s). The pending application(s), if any, are also disposed of.

For compliance, to come up on 3.4.2023.