A S IYER Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition, the Petitioner claims that his retiral benefits such as pension and gratuity be computed, taking into account the service rendered by him with the Institute of Sugarcane research, Lucknow from July 27, 1953 to november 17, 1965 and for setting aside the order of Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 levying penal rent on the Petitioner and recovering it from the gratuity payable by Respondent Nos. 3 and 4. The Petitioner has also sought a writ striking down the Rule imposing ceiling on the amount of gratuity payable to the petitioner as also for a direction to Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to pay to him pro-rota pension for the service rendered by him with the erstwhile employer.

(2.) THE Petitioner was initially employed with the Institute of Sugarcane Research, lucknow as an Assistant Agricultural Engineer from July 27, 1963. He resigned on November 17, 1965 and immediately on then next day, joined the services of Oil and Natural Gas commission (hereinafter referred to as ongc) as an Executive Engineer. On december 31, 1985 on attaining the age of superannuation, he retired from the service of ongc. Thus, the Petitioner put in a total of 12 years service with the Institute of Sugarcane research which was governed by Respondent nos. 1 and 2 and 19 years with the ONGC. According to the Petitioner, although his entire service rendered with both his employers is to be considered for the purposes of computation of retiral benefits, the respondents have failed to do so. According to him, on his retirement, he was entitled to earned wages for the month of December 1984, gratuity to the tune of Rs. 69,014. 42 and pro-rata pension. It appears that the ONGC did not clear the dues of the petitioner as the Petitioner continued to occupy the service quarters allotted to him. Time and again, the Petitioner sought for extension of the period for staying in the service quarters as the private accommodation which he wished to avail of was not available.

(3.) NOTICE was issued to him under the public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised occupants) Act by the Estate Officer and a penal rent was imposed on the Petitioner. On november 3, 1989, the Petitioner received an amount of Rs. 12,237. 40 towards the gratuity after deducting the penal rent of Rs. 23,762. 60. The Petitioner protested against this amount as the gratuity had been calculated by imposing a ceiling of Rs. 36,000. Moreover, the service rendered by him with the Institute of Sugarcane research, Lucknow was not considered for the purpose of computing the gratuity. The ONGC had merely considered the service rendered by the Petitioner with it of 19 years rather than a total of 29 years taking into account the services of the Petitioner with both his employers. According to the Petitioner, he has been paid an amount of Rs. 56,777. 02 less than the amount due and payable to him as gratuity. As regards pension the Petitioner has claimed pro-rata pension as those Central Government employees, who had been absorbed in service or posted in a Corporation or company wholly or substantially controlled by the Central government, were entitled to pension on the basis of the services rendered with the Central government under Rule 37 of the Central Civil services (Pension) Rules, 1972. Although, the unpaid salary was paid on December 4, 1990, the Petitioner now claims interest on this amount as well as the other amounts which are due and payable to him.