Subhash Prasad Sinha vs The Jharkhand State Agricultural Marketing Board

Mr. Pramath Patnaik, J.—In the accompanied writ application, the petitioner has inter alia, prayed for direction upon the respondents to pay the admissible gratuity and due Group Insurance and other retiral dues with interest.

The facts, in brief, is that the petitioners were appointed by the Bihar State Agricultural Marketing Board and after bifurcation of the State of Bihar, the petitioners who were posted and working on the appointed day i.e. on 15.11.2000 in the territory of State of Jharkhand, as per the provisions of Jharkhand State Marketing Board, they continued to discharge their duties in the State of Jharkhand till they attained the age of superannuation.

Learned senior counsel for the petitioners submitted that though after retirement, the petitioners have been paid some of their retiral dues but gratuity and Group Insurance amount has not been paid till date, for which, they have submitted representation on 06.10.2015. It has further been submitted that respondents may be directed to make payments of their retiral dues from their own fund and sources subject to realization/adjustment, if at all from the State of Bihar and/or Bihar State Agricultural Board. In support of his contention, learned senior counsel for the petitioners referred to a decision rendered in the case of Bharti Prasad Thakur v. Sidhu Kanhu University, Dumka & Ors. as reported in 2002 (2) JCR 554 and further in the case of Akhileshwar Prasad & Ors. v. Bihar State Electricity & Ors. as reported in 2006 (2) JCR 418.

Learned counsel for the respondents did not dispute the entitlement of the gratuity and Group Insurance but submitted that as was the usual practise, the amount of gratuity and Group Insurance of the employees for the period prior to 01.09.2008 was remitted to Bihar State Agricultural Marketing Board and a decision to this effect was taken in the meeting of the Board of Directors of Jharkhand State Agricultural Marketing Board on 30.08.2008. Accordingly, the respondents have sent the amount of gratuity and group insurance to the Board at Patna by way of Bank Draft as evident from letter dated 25.07.2007, Annexure D to the supplementary counter affidavit. It has further been submitted that up-to 2015, Bihar State Agricultural Marketing Board has been paying gratuity and Group Insurance of the employees up-to 31.08.2008 and for the remaining period, payment towards gratuity and group insurance were being made by the Jharkhand State Agricultural Marketing Board. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted in similarly situated employees, Rewati Raman, Sachindra Nath Thakur and others, who have retired from the service of Jharkhand State Agricultural Marketing Board, the gratuity and Group Insurance for the period prior to 31.08.2008 has been released by the Board at Patna and for subsequent period i.e. 01.09.2008, the amount of gratuity and group insurance have been paid by the Board at Ranchi. It has been submitted that this fact is well known to the petitioner, but, they did not choose to implead Bihar State Agriculture Marketing Board as party-respondent.

Learned senior counsel for the petitioners countered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the respondents and submitted that only due to delayed payment wrong plea has been taken that retiral dues amount on account of gratuity and Group Insurance have to come from Patna. Since the petitioners have retired from the services of the respondents, they are bound to make payment of entire amount to the petitioners.

From the pleadings of the parties, it emerges that there is no dispute that the petitioners are entitled to get gratuity and Group Insurance. Hence, in the fitness of things, without going into matter with regard to apportionment and adjustment of liability between the two States, as a result of bifurcation of State of Bihar since 15.11.2000, I am of the considered view that the petitioners, who have retired from the territory of State of Jharkhand and were working on the appointed day i.e. 15.11.2000 in the State of Jharkhand must get the amount of gratuity and group insurance from respondents.

In the result, the writ petition stands allowed with direction to the respondents to make payment of gratuity and Group Insurance to the petitioners as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. However, In the facts and circumstances, it is left open between the two States, i.e. State of Bihar and State of Jharkhand to determine the liability, if any, and further it is made clear that this Court has not made any comment/opinion on the apportionment/liability of the said amount.