LAKSHMIPATHI Vs. KARNATAKA LEGAL AID BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This case is illustrative of how persons who are closest to the Judicial System and who have spent their whole life in the process of assisting in the dispensation of Justice to all and sundry can themselves be at the receiving end when it comes to their own cases. It is a sad reflection on the working of our Government Departments for which I see absolutely no justification, that inane and meaningless objections are raised on utterly senseless considerations and that all of these arise in relation to disbursement of small amounts of money in situations that can never be justified. The 'Babu mentality' that pervades a certain section of subordinate officers in the Government will have to be shed when it comes to dealing with these situations because it must be realised that it is a tremendous amount of waste of public and personal time getting into bureaucratic tussles on matters which are devoid of substance. Whether it is a question of reimbursing a Judge's Medical Bills or sanctioning and paying terminal benefits the situation has become both chronic and scandalous with the amount of harassment that the victim has to tolerate reaching staggering proportions. There is a charge, and to my mind not without substance, that where objections are raised without there being any justification that this is not done out of ignorance or stupidity but that it has its genesis in corrupt motives because a personal visit to the Department invariably results in some forms or horse trading and the problem is overcome. If the victim stands his ground, very profound objections are put forward and he is even told to bring appropriate Court Orders knowing fully well how expensive and time consuming and unpredictable the situations are. These observations have become necessary because corrective action is essential.

(2.) The present petitioner started his career on 25.1.1950 as a Second Division Clerk in the II Munsiff's Court, Bangalore and after working in various Courts, was transferred to the High Court of Karnataka in 1958. He was an efficient employee who passed all the Departmental Tests and got promotion to the cadre of First Division Clerk, Senior Assistant and Section Officer. The petitioner was deputed to serve in the Legal Aid Board as Section Officer with effect from 1.1.1980. With effect from 5.3.91, the Karnataka Legal Aid Board was established as a statutory body. The Board moved the State Government for purposes of absorbing the services of the petitioner and after consultation with the Registrar of the High Court, an order dated 18.12.1985 was passed permitting the absorption in the public interest protecting all the accrued service benefits such as gratuity, pension etc. The petitioner's services having continued to be good, he was promoted to the cadre of Assistant Secretary carrying a pay scale of Rs. 2200-4070/-. The Petitioner thereafter attained the age of superannuation and retired from the services of the Board on the afternoon of 31.12.1989.

(3.) Then followed the inevitable struggle that almost every retired Government employee has to go through for purposes of obtaining his terminal benefits, The petitioner has set out the correspondence that ensued right upto January 1993 for over three years the controversy being that the Government proceeded on the footing that the petitioner has ceased to be its employee with effect from 18.12.1985 when he was absorbed by the Board. The contention of the Government was that it was required only to pay the petitioner upto that date and that for purposes of total length of service last salary drawn and all other issues relevant to the fixation of pension and terminal benefits that this would be the cut off date and that the Board was responsible for the payment in relation to the subsequent years of service.