JOTI RAM Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) It comes out that the petitioner joined the service as a Peon in the regular cadre in the District Primary Cooperative Agriculture and Rural Development Bank Limited, Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar. Later on, in the year 2007 he was appointed as a Daftri. It also comes out that later on, the cadre of all the District Primary Cooperative Agriculture and Rural Development Bank Limited in the State were merged in one cadre and vide order dated 21.5.1996. The petitioner was brought on the common cadre of respondent No. 2 in Haryana State Cooperative Agriculture and Rural Development Bank Limited, though he continued to work at Yamuna Nagar. On the request of the petitioner himself, the gratuity for the period he worked with respondent No. 3 i.e. District Primary Cooperative Agriculture and Rural Bank Limited, Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar, amounting to Rs. 10,402-12, was released to him on 11.2006, vide voucher No. 3738. The petitioner retired from service of respondent No. 2 on 31.8.2011. In the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks the writ of mandamus directing respondents to release the payment of gratuity amounting to Rs. 4,10,843/- alongwith interest at the rate of 18% per annum, claiming that some gratuity is payable. However, the same is resisted by the bank on the ground that the gratuity for the period when he was not brought on the common cadre was already released to him on 11.2006. The mater has already been considered by this Court in CWP No. 8596 of 2014, titled as Sat Narain v. State of Haryana and others, decided on 14.12016, involving similar facts. This Court has observed as under :-

(3.) In view of the matter, the present writ petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to deposit back Rs. 10,402-12 alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per annum from 2.11.2006 till the date of deposit and after deposit of the said amount, respondents shall re-calculate the gratuity, payable to the petitioner on the basis of last pay drawn by him and release the gratuity in accordance with rules. However, if the excess payment is already made to the petitioner, the same can be adjusted in the said amount.