VEJJU RAMA MOHAN RAO Vs. COMMISSIONER FOR CO OPERATION AND REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES A P HYDERABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, in the instant writ petition, seeks a mandamus to declare the action of the 2nd respondent in not allowing the service benefits of leave encashment for 240 days and 20 months Gratuity consequent on his retirement from service as contrary to the proceedings of the 1st respondent in Rc No. 33842/95-C3 dated 7-11-1996 and for a consequential direction to the 2nd respondent to pay the service benefits to the petitioner together with interest at 12% p.a. from 1-4-1996 till the date of payment. The facts, which are not in dispute, are as under.

(2.) The petitioner while working as Supervisor in the 2nd respondent Cooperative Bank at Eluru retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31-3-1996. According to the service rules existing at the time of petitioner's retirement, he is entitled to leave encashment for 180 days and Gratuity for 15 months. While he was in service the 1st respondent addressed a letter dated 4-1-1996 to the 2nd respondent requesting to place the matter before the Board regarding providing encashment of earned leave for 240 days in place of 180 days and also Gratuity at 20 months pay last drawn instead of 15 months. In response to the said letter, the Board of Management of the 2nd respondent-Bank passed a resolution on 14-3-1996 vide resolution No. 23 to provide encashment of earned leave for 240 days in place of 180 days and also the Gratuity at 20 months last pay drawn instead of 15 months presently enjoying by the DCC Bank, Eluru employees as per award and to request the 1st respondent to approve the same. The said resolution was forwarded by the 2nd respondent through their letter dated 21-3-1996 to the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent by proceedings Rc. No. 33842/ 9503 dated 7-11-1996 accorded permission for leave encashment and also Gratuity as resolved by the 2nd respondent but the said benefit shall not be extended with any retrospective effect. It means the said benefit will have prospective, effect i.e., 7-11-1996 the date on which permission was accorded. In view of the same, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner, Sri Vedula Venkataramana made the following submissions.