Rakesh Kumar And Others vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others

Ravindra Maithani, J

By means of the instant writ petition, petitioners seek the following reliefs:

"1- To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus to respondent No.1 to 5 to pay the remaining dues of 13% of amount of calculated Ex-gratia under voluntary retirement scheme and the arrears of salary of the petitioners and arrears of revised pay under the recommendation of 6th pay commission to the petitioners along with 18% interest on voluntary retiral benefits, arrears of salary and arrears of revised pay under the recommendation of 6th pay commission from the date of accrual.

2- or any other relief which the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the instant case."

It is the case of the petitioners that having served the respondent no.5, Garhwal Cooperative Milk Union, they were required to opt for voluntary retirement under the Voluntary Retirement Rules for Personnel of Milk Producers Unions Rules, 2017 (for short, "VRS Scheme"). But, the dues have yet not been paid. Counter affidavits have been filed by the respondent nos.2, 3 and 5. The respondent nos.2 and 3, in their counter affidavit, have stated that 13% of amount of the calculated ex-gratia has already been paid under the VRS Scheme. Since the department is in short of funds, therefore, entire payment could not be made.

Respondent no.5, in his counter affidavit has also admitted the claim. In para no.8, it is stated as hereunder:-

"That the contents of para no.9 of the writ petition as stated are denied. It is submitted that the voluntary retirement scheme was accepted voluntarily by the petitioners and not under duress. Respondent no.5 is running in losses for last 15 years and then in the financial year 2017-18 the losses were Rs.8,63,21,613/-. In fact, apart from the petitioners there are other employees whose salaries have not been paid. The organization pays salary and other allowance from the profits which it earns. Since the organization is running at losses, therefore, payment of salary has not been done. As regards payment of VIth Pay Commission has been made applicable from August, 2009. As regards payment of VIth Pay Commission from 01-06-2006 to 31-07-2009 no such order has been passed owing to the weak financial condition of respondent no.5. In future, if the financial condition of the respondent no.5 improves it will consider making payment of salary. IN this regard, copy of the date from the year 2004-05 uptill 2017-18 and the balance sheet, profit and loss account for the year 2016-17 are collectively being annexed herewith and marked as Annexure No.CA-1 to this affidavit"

In para no.11 again, the respondent no.5 states, "it is purely for the said reason that payment of salary has not been made. In case the financial condition of the respondent no.5 improves the payment would be made."

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the claim has already been admitted by the respondents, therefore, the writ petition deserves to be allowed.

Learned State counsel would submit that the State had already paid 13% of the gratuity.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.5 would submit that respondent no.5 admits the claim, but due to financial crises, the respondent no.5 is not in a position to make the payment. As and when the financial condition of the respondent no.5 improves, the payment shall be made.

It is a petition, in which, the respondents have, in fact, admitted the claim. Not only this, partially the State had already made payment 13% of the ex-gratia amount under the VRS Scheme. In view of it, the writ petition deserves to be allowed.

The writ petition is allowed.

The respondent no.5 is directed to make payment of all the admissible dues to the petitioners within a period of two months from today.