G.S.Prasada Rao, Hyd vs The V.C. And Managing Director, Hyd
2025 Latest Caselaw 3298 Tel

Telangana High Court

G.S.Prasada Rao, Hyd vs The V.C. And Managing Director, Hyd on 21 March, 2025

Author: P.Sree Sudha

Bench: P.Sree Sudha

      THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA

              WRIT PETITION No.10047 of 2010

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner requesting the

Court to declare the action of the respondent in passing the

impugned Order dated 30.01.2010, rejecting the claim of the

petitioner to grant interest @ 18% per annum on the

terminal/retirement benefits of Gratuity and leave encashment

of Rs.4,35,388.30/- for the period from 01.04.2004 to

10.09.2008 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and

21 of the Constitution of India.

2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner is present and learned

Counsel for the respondent is absent.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner stated that petitioner

joined in the respondent Corporation as Senior Seed Officer

during the year 1978 and he was promoted as Regional

Manager/Manager during the year 1982. He was issued with a

Charge Memo vide Memo No.SSDC/Admn/2001-02, dated

09.09.2001 by the respondent Corporation for certain alleged

irregularities pertaining to the year 1997. Petitioner had

submitted his explanation on 07.11.2001 and Departmental

enquiry was conducted. The Enquiry Officer submitted the

Enquiry report on 17.05.2005, holding that the charges held not

proved. Similarly, another Charge Memo No.SSDC/Admn/2002-

03, dated 28.12.2002, was issued by the respondent against the

petitioner for the irregularities took place in supply of Sunflower

seed on 50% subsidy during the year 1997-98. Petitioner had

submitted a detailed explanation on 17.01.2003 and a

Departmental Enquiry was conducted and the Enquiry Officer

had also submitted report on 27.10.2005 by holding that

alleged charges were not proved. Thereafter, the Disciplinary

authority issued a Memo No.SSDC/Admn/2006/07, dated

08.01.2007 i.e., after two years, by disagreeing with the findings

of the Enquiry Officer and directed the petitioner to submit

representation, as such petitioner submitted a representation

on 25.01.2007.

4. During the pendency of the above alleged charges,

petitioner attained the age of superannuation and he was

relieved from service on 31.03.2004, but even after the

retirement, pensionary benefits i.e., Gratuity and leave

encashment were not released by the respondent Corporation,

as such petitioner made several representations. Finally, vide

proceedings No.SSDC/A/16/2008-09, dated 08.09.2008,

respondent Corporation dropped the charges against the

petitioner and released the Gratuity and leave encashment

benefits to the tune of Rs.4,35,388.30/-, but without interest.

Therefore, petitioner made a representation to the respondent

Corporation on 16.02.2009 and also on 11.01.2010, requesting

to grant interest @ 18% per annum on the delayed payment of

Rs.4,35,388.30/-. On that, respondent Corporation has passed

the impugned Order dated 30.01.2010 vide

No.SSDC/Admn./2009-10/299, and stated that as per

G.O.Rt.No.1034, Fin.&Plg.(FW Pen.I) Department, dated

09.06.2000, any individual is eligible for interest from the date of

final orders only. In your case, the final orders were issued on

08.09.2008 and terminal benefits were paid on 11.09.2008.

Hence, you are not eligible for any interest on the terminal

benefits. Aggrieved by the said impugned Order, the present writ

petition is preferred.

5. In the counter filed by the General Manager (Admn.),

APSSDC Ltd, Hyderabad, he stated that irregularities were

reported during the physical verification of records in

distribution of Sunflower seeds under subsidy in the Warangal

District during the year 1997-98. Disciplinary action was

initiated against the petitioner and seven other employees of

APSSDC Ltd., by issuing Charge Memos on 28.12.2002 and

Enquiry Officer was appointed on 23.03.2003. In the

meanwhile, petitioner was retired on 31.03.2004. The petitioner

was paid EPF amount of Rs.6,02,041/-, but payment of gratuity

and leave encashment benefits were with held as enquiry was

not completed. The Enquiry Officer submitted his report on

27.10.2005, stating that charges made against the petitioner

were not proved. Considering the explanation of the petitioner

dated 25.01.2007, the charges were dropped against him and

other benefits could not be paid as he was not the only person

and there were seven other employees facing disciplinary action.

After passing the orders on 08.09.2008, he was paid the

terminal benefits of gratuity and leave encashment to the tune

of Rs.4,38,388/- on 11.09.2008, as such there was no delay on

the part of the Corporation in payment of terminal benefits and

requested the Court to dismiss the present writ petition.

6. The learned Counsel for the petitioner relied upon the

decision of this Court dated 21.08.2024 in W.P.No.1960 of

2018, in which it was held as follows:

"8. The learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.4845 of 2019, held as follows:

"A Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and for the State of Andhra Pradesh, has passed a common order dated 15.11.2018, in W.P.Nos.25587, 26311 and 26381 of 2018, by relying on the Judgment in State of U.P. Vs. Shri Krishna Pandey, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court, while dealing with initiation of a departmental enquiry against the respondent therein after his retirement from service, observed that as in Rule 9 (2)(b)(ii) of the Rules of 1980, Regulation 351-A of the Civil Services Regulations, which was under consideration, provided that departmental proceedings, if not instituted before retirement, shall not be instituted in respect of an even which took place more than four years before such institution, as in Rule 9 (6) of the Rules of 1980, the Explanation to Regulation 351-A provided that departmental proceedings shall be deemed to have been instituted when the charges framed against the pensioner were issued to him or from the date of his being placed under suspension, if applicable. Ultimately the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that departmental proceedings must be instituted before lapse of four years from the date on which the event of misconduct had taken place."

9. This Court is not inclined to take a different view. In view of the above facts, impugned Charge Memo dated 24.07.2018, is liable to be quashed.

10. Writ petition is allowed, quashing the impugned Charge Memo dated 24.07.2018 issued. The respondents are directed to fix 25% pension payable to the petitioner and pay the same and gratuity and other retirement benefits to the petitioner together with interest @ 9% per annum from the date they become due till the date of payment. There shall be no order as to costs."

7. The writ petitioner herein mainly requested for interest on

the gratuity amount and leave encashment amount paid to him

with delay. Whereas, respondent contended that in view of

pendency of the disciplinary proceedings on seven other

employees, they could not finalize the enquiry, as such there is

delay in payment. The reasons stated by the respondent

Corporation are neither convincing nor satisfactory and

moreover the enquiry was initiated and charges were framed in

the years 2001 and 2002, but the enquiry was finalized and

orders to release retirement benefits was passed in the year

2008 and the petitioner cannot be penalized for the finalization

of the enquiry. In fact, petitioner was retired during the

pendency of the enquiry, as such the contention of the

respondent Corporation cannot be accepted and they are

directed to pay the interest @ 9% per annum on the amount of

Rs.4,35,388.30/- from 01.04.2004 to 10.09.2008 within one

month from the date of this Order i.e., on or before 21.04.2025,

failing which they are liable to pay interest on the said amount

@ 7.5% per annum from 21.04.2025 to till the date of

realization.

8. In the result, the present writ petition is allowed directing

the respondent to pay the interest @ 9% per annum on the

amount of Rs.4,35,388.30/- from 01.04.2004 to 10.09.2008

within one month from the date of this Order i.e., on or before

21.04.2025, failing which they are liable to pay interest on the

said amount @ 7.5% per annum from 21.04.2025 to till the date

of realization.

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand

closed.

_________________________ JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA

DATE: 21.03.2025 tri

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA

WRIT PETITION No.10047 of 2010

DATE: 21.03.2025

TRI