ASHOK KHOSLA Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order of Appellate Authority under Payment of Gratuity Act( hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The petitioner has obtained Voluntary Retirement under SBI Voluntary Retirement Scheme. Before applying for V.R.S, the petitioner was on ad hoc promotion as MMG/S-II. He was promoted conditionally on giving an undertaking that he will do Rural/Semi Urban Assignment for three years.

(2.) However, after his promotion, he started making representations that he should be exempted from Rural/Semi Urban Assignment on the ground of his being a handicapped. His representations were ultimately rejected and he was told that he will have to do Rural/Semi Urban Assignment. In the mean time, SBI came out with a Voluntary Retirement Scheme in January, 2001. The petitioner, with his free will, opted for voluntary retirement scheme. One of the conditions of SBI Voluntary Retirement Scheme was that an officer who had not completed Rural/Semi Urban Assignment under MMGS-II and seeks voluntary retirement, he shall be reverted to the post of JMGS-I. However, the salary already given to him on the post of MMGS-II, shall not be recovered from him. Knowing this fully well, the petitioner opted for V.R.S and he was allowed V.R.S after reverting in JMGS-I Grade, and re-fixing his pay on the date of his retirement in that Grade. He was paid retirement benefits including gratuity as per revised salary in JMGS-I Grade. He filed an application before competent authority under the Act that he should be paid gratuity on actual drawn wages i.e. salary of MMGS-II Grade and no JMGS-I Grade. The competent authority dismissed the application of the petitioner, holding that gratuity is payable on legally payable salary and not on actual drawn salary. The Competent Authority observed that if the contention of the petitioner was accepted, it would lead to anomalies. If a person retires from service and after his retirement, pay scales are revised and he becomes entitled to revised pay scales and consequential benefits but if gratuity is payable on actual last drawn salary, then such employee would not be entitled for gratuity as per revised pay scale while legally he should be entitled for gratuity on what was his last legal pay. Against the order of Competent Authority, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority agreed that the decision of the Competent Authority. It is observed that since the petitioner was reverted to JMGS-I and his basic pay was fixed at Rs.14240/-, accordingly gratuity was payable to the petitioner on this scale which was his last drawn legal wages.

(3.) The petitioner had preferred a writ petition challenging his reversal from MMGS-II to JMGS-I on his opting for V.R.S. The writ petition of the petitioner has been dismissed vide separate judgment.