BHANUMATI PRASAD Vs. RANCHI UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein was the founder Principal of the Ranchi women's College established in or about the year 1949 under the then Bihar University. The aforesaid College became constituent college under the Ranchi University. The petitioner functioned as its Principal for many years and reached the age of superannuation on 28.2.1988. Till her superannuation the petitioner was being paid all her dues as were admissible to her as Principal of the Ranchi Woman's College. She claims that she had an unblemished record of service. The grievance of the petitioner is that the amount payable to her by way of gratuity is not being paid to her despite repeated demands. The University has acted in a most arbitrary manner in withholding the gratuity amount payable to her. She has therefore prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to pay her the amount of gratuity which she is entitled to receive.

(2.) The petitioner has stated in the writ petition that the Ranchi University had introduced a Triple Benefit Scheme called as Contributory Provident Fund-cum-Pension-cum-Gratuity Scheme. The petitioner exercised her option to be governed by the said Scheme. The petitioner is being paid her pension under the said Scheme. The petitioner further claims that she is entitled to gratuity under the relevant statutes of the Ranchi University and the gratuity is payable by the University on her retirement. The maximum amount of gratuity has been fixed at Rs.30,000/- and she is entitled to this amount. However, the respondents made payment of a very paltry sum of Rs. 204/- only to the petitioner and a sum of Rs. 29,796/- was unlawfully and wrongfully withheld for no good reason. A baseless and unfounded allegation is made against the petitioner regarding misappropriation of funds. This is not only an excuse for not paying gratuity to the petitioner, since at no stage during her long years of service, there was any such allegation against the petitioner. She was never informed of any such allegation against her nor was she ever required to submit any explanation in regard to such allegation. Only after retirement, when the petitioner claimed her lawful dues, such allegations are sought to be made. The petitioner made a representation to the Chancellor of the Ranchi University (Respondent No. 2) on 20th May, 1985 but despite the lapse of more than two years nothing more was paid to the petitioner. Under these circumstances the petitioner filed the instant writ petition on 25.5.1987.

(3.) The writ petition was admitted for hearing on 31.10.1987. While admitting the write petition, after hearing the parties, this Court directed that in case the petitioner is found entitled to the payment of gratuity, she shall be entitled to interest on the amount found payable to her with effect from 1st March, 1981 at the rate of 18 per cent per annum, apart from costs that may be awarded against the University.