Kerala High Court
P.P.Jose vs State Of Kerala on 28 January, 2021
W.A.No.1579/2020 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI
THURSDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 8TH MAGHA, 1942
WA.No.1579 OF 2020
AGAINST JUDGMENT DT.17.7.2020 IN WP(C)12048/2020(E)OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN WPC:
P.P.JOSE, AGED 63 YEARS
S/O. POULOSE, REGIONAL MANAGER (RETIRED)
KERALA STATE CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION LIMITED,
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE, BAY UNDER THE BRIDGE, VYTILA,
ERNAKULAM RESIDING AT PADUVAN KACHAPPILLY HOUSE,
KARAYAM PARAMBU, KARUKUTTY (PO)ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.M.V.THAMBAN
SRI.R.REJI, SMT.THARA THAMBAN
SRI.B.BIPIN, SRI.ARUN BOSE
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN WPC:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN 695 001
2 KERALA STATE CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION LIMITED,
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE, DOOR NO. 30/152IA, BAY UNDER
THE BRIDGE, NORTHERN SIDE OF RAILWAY PONNURUNNY,
VYTTILA, COCHIN PIN 682 019
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
3 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
KERALA STATE CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION LIMITED,
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE, DOOR NO. 30/15121A, BAY UNDER
THE BRIDGE, NORTHERN SIDE OF RAILWAY, PONNURUNNY,
VYTTILA, COCHIN, PIN 682 019
R1 BY SRI.B.VINOD, SR.GP,
R2-3 BY ADV. SHRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR, SC, KSCC LTD.
R2-3 BY ADV. SRI.G.BIJU
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
28.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A.No.1579/2020 2
ALEXANDER THOMAS & T.R. RAVI, JJ.
------------------------------------------------
W.A.No.1579 of 2020
[Arising out of the impugned judgment dated
17.07.2020 in W.P.(C)No.12048/2020]
--------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 28th day of January, 2021
JUDGMENT
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
The appellant herein had filed the above mentioned writ petition
before this Court with the following prayers (see page No.24 of the
paper book of this appeal);
"(i) To issue a declaration that the act of the respondents in
withholding the gratuity and other retirement benefits due to the
petitioner is illegal, without any authority of law and that the
petitioner is entitled to interest at the rate of 18% per annum for the
delayed payment of his retirement benefits from date of its due till
its actual payment.
(ii) To issue a certiorari or any other appropriate writ or
order calling for the records leading up to Exhibit P1 and quash the
same.
(iii) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate
writ, order or direction, directing the respondents 2 and 3 to
disburse all the terminal benefits due to the petitioner such as
gratuity, leave surrender, 2004 and 2009 pay revision arrears,
forthwith.
(iv) To issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents
to pay interest at the rate of 18% to the petitioner for the delay in
disbursing his gratuity, leave surrender and 2004 pay revision
arrears, from its date it became due till the date of actual
disbursement.
(v) To issue such other further reliefs as this Honourable
Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of
this case. "
2. The learned Single Judge as per the impugned judgment
dated 17.07.2020 has taken note of the fact that the writ
petitioner/appellant herein had retired from service from the 2 nd
respondent Kerala State Construction Corporation Limited as early as
on 30.11.2014, that there occurred inordinate delay in finalising the
alleged liabilities of the petitioner and that it is only as late as on
14.07.2020 that the competent authority of the 1 st respondent
Government in the Public Works Department has directed the 2 nd
respondent Corporation to issue the Non Liability Certificate and
disburse due pensionary benefits of the writ petitioner after seeking his
explanation. Accordingly, this Court had directed that the Non Liability
Certificate should be issued in favour of the writ petitioner by the 2 nd
respondent within two weeks and on being satisfied of the explanation
and keeping in mind the various aspects of the matter all his retirement
benefits as claimed in Exts.P3 to P6 will be disbursed to him. However,
the learned Single Judge has specifically ordered that the writ
petitioner's claim for interest on the delayed payment of his retirement
benefits is left open to be agitated before the appropriate forum/court
concerned. It appears that subsequently respondents had disbursed
the DCRG amount due to the writ petitioner/appellant on 11.11.2020,
i.e., after the filing of the present appeal. The writ petitioner has filed
the instant writ appeal only for the purpose of modifying the impugned
judgment of the learned Single Judge to the extent it has not granted
interest on delayed payment of the withheld amounts. This Court while
entertaining this writ appeal has passed a detailed order dated
09.12.2020 in this writ appeal, which reads as follows;
"This is a case in which there had been substantial delay on
the part of the 2nd respondent in paying the retirement benefits of
the appellant. However, during the pendency of the writ petition, as
per the Government directions, the retirement benefits had been
paid. This appeal has been filed seeking interest for the delayed
payment.
2. We find from the present records that, though a letter
dated 28.12.2016 has been issued by the Kerala State Construction
Corporation Limited to the Additional Chief Secretary to
Government, Public Works Department, Thiruvananthapuram
clarifying that there is no dues from the Officer concerned, it seems
that the Government had asked for an audit by a third party in a
statement filed on behalf of the Kerala State Construction
Corporation Limited. It is stated the the audit report was forwarded
to the Government on 24.5.2017. The Government sought for certain
clarifications as per letter dated 25.10.2017, which was forwarded
as per letter dated 27.10.2017 and thereafter nothing was heard in
the matter. From the present set of facts made available to us, it is
rather clear that there has been gross negligence in handling the
matter at Government level. We are also surprised to note that even
the Construction Corporation has been keeping quiet for about three
years to get a response form the Government. Only when the
appellant filed the writ petition before this Court that the authorities
woke up from their slumber.
3. The only benefit that a retired employee gets is in the form
of DCRG and other pensionary benefits. If that is delayed, it will
cause substantial injustice to the pensioner. If at all there is any
infirmity in the work that he had done, once it is clarified and
reports are made available, there should not have been any further
delay on the part of the Government in disbursing the pensionary
benefits.
4. Under such circumstances, the 1 st respondent shall file an
affidavit before this Court detailing the circumstances under which
there had been delay in disbursing the pensionary benefits to the
appellant. The affidavit shall be filed on or before 21.12.2020.
Post on 21.12.2020."
3. The above said order dated 09.12.2020 is self explanatory
and the factual contents of the said order need not be reiterated. Even
now the respondents have not filed any pleadings or affidavit to explain
as to the reason for the inordinate delay in paying the due amounts
concerned to the writ petitioner. A reading of the impugned judgment
of the learned Single Judge dated 17.07.2020 in the writ petition would
also indicate that there has been serious delay and laches on the part of
the respondents at various stages in clearing various objections and
taking the necessary step of issuance of Non Liability
Certificate/Liability Certificate, as the case may be. It appears that the
amounts withheld were directed to be paid by the learned Single Judge
as per the impugned judgment dated 17.07.2020 and it is only
thereafter that the said amounts have been paid. We need not get into
the factual details of the amounts withheld, which were directed to be
paid by the learned Single Judge. The respondents have not filed any
review or appeal to challenge the findings of the learned Single Judge
in the impugned judgment dated 17.07.2020 in W.P.
(C)No.12048/2020. The respondents have not offered any explanation
whatsoever on the various points covered in this Court's order dated
09.12.2020 rendered in this appeal. Hence we are constrained to take
the view that the amounts due to the petitioner were withheld with
inordinate delay.
4. In the light of these aspects, we are persuaded to accept the
pleas made by the learned counsel for the appellant/writ petitioner that
the appellant/writ petitioner is entitled for interest on the delayed
payment of the due amounts, which were subsequently paid in
pursuance of the directions issued by this Court in the impugned
judgment dated 17.07.2020 in the writ petition. The appellant/writ
petitioner has retired from service from the respondent Corporation on
30.11.2014. Since various procedural formalities and objections are to
be cleared, we are inclined to take the view that the respondents should
be given at least a grace period of one year from the date of retirement
to clear all such objections. The said period of one year from the date of
retirement has expired on 30.11.2015. Immediately thereafter, at least
within the said outer time limit of one year, the competent authority
among the respondents should have taken steps to clear the various
formalities and then to ensure that the amounts due to the
appellant/writ petitioner which were withheld should have been
released to him without any further delay.
5. Sri M.V.Thamban learned counsel appearing for the
appellant/writ petitioner would submit that the amounts were actually
disbursed to the petitioner only on 11.11.2020 and that too after the
filing of the present writ appeal on 17.8.2020. In the light of these
aspects, we are of the view that it is only just, fair and reasonable that
interest should also be awarded to the appellant/writ petitioner, for
delayed payment of the withheld amounts which were directed to be
paid as per the directions of the learned single Judge in the impugned
judgment in W.P.(C)No.12048/2020. However, taking into account
various aspects of the matter, we are not inclined to grant interest on
the higher side of 10 to 12% as pleaded by the learned counsel for the
appellant/writ petitioner. Taking note of various aspects of the matter,
it is ordered in the interest of justice that respondents 2 and 3 will
ensure that interest at the rate of 6% per annum should be paid on the
withheld amounts which were directed to be paid as per the impugned
directions of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C)No.12048/2020 and
the said interest amount shall be paid to the petitioner without any
further delay, at any rate, within an outer time limit of two months
from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment.
Counsel for the appellant/writ petitioner may ensure that certified copy
of this judgment is forwarded to the 3 rd respondent Managing Director
of the Kerala State Construction Corporation Limited for immediate
compliance and the period of two months will be reckoned from the
date of receipt of the certified copy of this judgment by the 3 rd
respondent. The directions and orders of the learned Single Judge in
the impugned judgment dated 17.07.2020 in W.P.(C)No.12048/2020
will stand modified to the limited extent as above.
With these observations and directions, the above writ appeal will
stand finally disposed of.
Sd/-
ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE
Sd/-
T.R. RAVI, JUDGE
dsn
