VEDANAPARTHI JAYACHANDRA RADDY Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief:-

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that he was selected and appointed as Staff Assistant/ Supervisor in the District Cooperative Central Bank Limited, SPSR Nellore and joined duty on 16/7/2012 and after training he was posted to NDCCB Kota Branch at Kota and worked there from 1/8/2012 to 30/6/2019. The main grievance of the petitioner is that he was not paid terminal benefits. Therefore, he made representations on 6/10/2019 and 20/1/2021 to the 4th respondent seeking to release of his terminal benefits. Then, the 4th respondent informed him that the bank will settle terminal benefits on finalization of the surcharge enquiry. Basing on the vigilance report, the 4th respondent has terminated the petitioner from his service four days before his retirement on superannuation i.e., 26/6/2019, his retirement date is 30/6/2019 and also mentioned that treating the suspension period of four days as loss of pay besides recovery of loss caused to the bank. Basing on the inspection report, the 3rd respondent has initiated surcharge proceedings on 10/6/2020 under Sec. 600(1) of AP Cooperative Societies Act 1964 against the petitioner and other employees. Challenging the same the petitioner has preferred writ petitions vide WP Nos. 15532 of 20220 and 15541 of 2020 before this Court, which are pending consideration. It is further stated that since the specific exemption is given under the A.P. Cooperative Societies Rules 1964, the 4th respondent cannot withhold his terminal benefits on the ground that surcharge proceedings are pending, which is highly illegal and arbitrary. Hence, the present writ petition.

(3.) Counter affidavit is filed by the respondent denying all the allegations made in the petition and contended that the petitioner was retired from service of the Bank on 30/6/2022 and at the time of his retirement he was under suspension. While communicating the retirement intimation, the Bank has informed that the retirement benefits of the incumbent will be released on finalization of enquiries and charges pending if any. But after completion of enquiry, the enquiry officer concluded that the charges leveled against the charged employee is established and therefore the charge is held proved, the act of the employee comes under gross misconduct. Hence, by following the due procedure, the competent authority has issued the proceedings dtd. 2/3/2020 terminating the petitioner from service and the suspension period will be treated as loss of pay besides recovery of the effected loss caused to the Bank funds of Rs.2,94,37,748.00 @ 18% of interest from tehd ate of disbursement of concerned loans. It is also stated that when an employee is terminated from the service he is not entitled to receive the terminal benefits and hence the Bank has not paid the terminal benefits to the petitioner.