V.JANAGAMBAL Vs. DEPUTY REGISTRAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed to quash the impugned order passed by the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.2538/2018/PAS dtd. 5/8/2019 and directing the respondents to pay the terminal benefits including the gratuity for the period of service rendered by the petitioner as saleswoman in the third respondent cooperative society from 8/1/1985 to 10/9/1989.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that she was appointed as a saleswoman in the 3rd respondent society through employment exchange in the year 1985. The appointment of the petitioner is the regular one and not through any back door. The petitioner was working as sales woman from 8/1/1985 to 10/8/1989 in the 3rd respondent co-operative credit society. On 12/8/1989, the petitioner was transferred from the 3rd respondent co-operative credit society to the 2nd respondent co-operative credit society vide order dtd. 10/8/1989 in Na Ka.No.11/1989 on the file of 3rd respondent. Since the date of transfer, the petitioner continued to work as a saleswoman in the 2 nd respondent co-operative credit society till her superannuation. The petitioner attained her age of superannuation on 31/10/2018 and she was permitted to retire by the 2nd respondent society with effect from 31/10/2018. The terminal benefits including gratuity to the tune of Rs.10,34,292.00 was granted to the petitioner. However the gratuity was not paid for the period of service rendered by the petitioner from 8/1/1985 to 10/8/1989 and was rejected by the first respondent vide order in Na.Ka.No.2538/2018/PAS dtd. 5/8/2019. Hence the writ petition is filed.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that while computing and disbursing the terminal benefits due to the petitioner, the respondents failed to compute the period of service rendered by the petitioner from 8/1/1985 to 10/8/1989 i.e, for four years ten days in the 3rd respondent society and granted the terminal benefits including gratuity to the tune of Rs.10,34,292.00 (Rupees ten lakhs and thirty four thousand and two hundred and ninety two only). The terminal benefits including the amount of gratuity were not computed including the period of service rendered by the petitioner in the 3rd respondent co-operative credit society from 8/1/1985 to 10/8/1989. Therefore, the petitioner made a representation to the 1 st respondent requesting him to pay the terminal benefits including gratuity by computing the service period from 8/1/1985 to 10/8/1989.