K. RAVICHANDRAN Vs. CHIEF SECRETARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) In all these Writ Petitions, the petitioners herein are the exemployees of three Co-operative Societies namely, a) Puducherry Public Servants Co-operative Stores P-456; b) Ariyankuppam Public Servants Stores P-455; and c) Bharathi Co-operative Consumer Stores Ltd., P-564. The petitioners herein were employed as Salesman / Assistant Clerk / Supervisors and had put in services between 20 to 25 years. As per the bye-laws of these Societies, the employee who have put in more than five years of continuous service in the stores shall be entitled for gratuity, apart from other service benefits including earned leave encashment, EPF contributions, ESI benefits and other admissible entailment. Around the year 2011, these Co-operative Stores were running on loss, which prompted the Government of Puducherry (hereinafter referred to as 'Government') to constitute a Rehabilitation Committee for improving the functioning of the Stores and to provide alternate employment to their staffs. By the month of March and April 2007, the salaries payable to the petitioners were stopped and ultimately on 22/1/2013, the Government had ordered for winding up of all these Stores. Consequently, the affairs of these Stores were handed over to the Liquidator. Thereafter, the Government had initiated efforts to accommodate the employees of the Stores including the petitioners herein in other Stores and Societies, which proved futile. The petitioners herein now seek for disbursement of their unpaid salaries, gratuity, earned leave encashment, EPF Contributions, ESI benefits and other admissible entailments along with interest.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the three Stores are fully owned by the Government, which was also contributing share capital every year and since the Government could not rehabilitate the Stores or provide for alternate employment for the petitioners herein, it is bound to settle their dues. According to the learned counsel, the statutory dues of gratuity cannot be avoided or averted. Likewise, the employees Provident Fund, which was deducted from their salaries are statutory benefits to which these petitioners are entitled to.