Research › Search › Judgment

Kerala High Court · body

2001 DIGILAW 418 (KER)

Uminer v. Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

2001-08-02

KURIAN JOSEPH

body2001
Judgment :- Kurian Joseph, J. The petitioners are employees retired from the K.S.R.T.C. It is unfortunate that the first thing that an employee, after his retirement, has to do is to file a Writ Petition for a direction in the matter of disbursement of his pensionary benefits. That is not a healthy practice. It is high time hence, certain general directions are issued so that the retired employees Of the K.S.R.T.C. would get peace. One thing that is certain, as far as an employee is concerned, is the date of retirement. Hence by retirement, the employee should also get his due benefits, and disbursement of the same is the duty of the employer. If the employer is not able to discharge its obligations in the matter of payment of wages and retirement benefits, there is no meaning in the existence of the establishment. The benefits that are due to an employee on retirement are as follows: 1. Provident Fund 2. Staff Welfare Fund 3. Death cum Retirement Gratuity 4. Pension-Commuted value of pension. 2. It is seen from the factual position that is available in these Original Petitions that, even the employees retired two years back are not paid the benefits stated above. It is also seen that there is no priority for the K.S.R.T.C. for the disbursement of the retirement benefits. It would be really unfortunate, if the retirement benefits are given only to persons who approach this Court and obtain orders. More unfortunate is the situation when disbursement of pensionary benefits, as pointed out in some of the cases, is only to a favoured few. 3. Learned Standing counsel for the K.S.R.T.C. submits that paucity of funds is the only reason for the delay in disbursement of the pensionary benefits. That by itself cannot be paused as a reason to delay the benefits. These are situations where the delay even tantamounts to denial. It is shocking to note that the Provident Fund and Staff Welfare Fund are also not paid on retirement. As far as these two amounts are concerned, there is absolutely no justification for retaining those amounts. Retention of such amounts, to put it mildly, would amount to breach of trust and misappropriation, because the K.S.R.T.C. has no right to withhold and use such amounts. Provident fund is a fund constituted of amounts provided by the employees only. As far as these two amounts are concerned, there is absolutely no justification for retaining those amounts. Retention of such amounts, to put it mildly, would amount to breach of trust and misappropriation, because the K.S.R.T.C. has no right to withhold and use such amounts. Provident fund is a fund constituted of amounts provided by the employees only. On termination of relationship on retirement, the employer ceases to be the custodian of such amounts. 4. In that view of the matter, as far as Provident Fund and Staff Welfare Fund amounts are concerned, there will be a direction to the K.S.R.T.C. to see that these two amounts are paid to all employees who retire from service within a period of six weeks from the date of retirement. In the case of those who have already retired, the payment will be made within a period of six weeks from today. 5. The situation is not different as far as gratuity is also concerned. The employees build high hopes over the retirement benefits. So, it would be unjust and improper to delay the payment. True, there is paucity of funds, as rightly pointed out by learned standing counsel. But, there must be some priority as far as retirement benefits are concerned. There should also be a priority list as far as the disbursement of pensionary benefits are concerned. It is unfair to drive all the retired employees to this court for getting their legitimate dues after retirement. Therefore, it is only just, fair and proper and in the interests of justice to issue a general direction to the K.S.R.T.C. that pensionary benefits, by way of death cum retirement gratuity, commuted value of pension and other benefits like leave salary, arrears of pension, etc. should be disbursed only on the basis of a priority list maintained by the K.S.R.T.C, The list shall be prepared on the basis of the date of retirement. Those who retired earlier should be given priority. The K.S.R.T.C. shall strictly follow the said list in the matter of payment of retirement benefits. 6. Learned standing counsel submits that there are various orders issued by this Court in the matter of payment of pensionary benefits. Those who retired earlier should be given priority. The K.S.R.T.C. shall strictly follow the said list in the matter of payment of retirement benefits. 6. Learned standing counsel submits that there are various orders issued by this Court in the matter of payment of pensionary benefits. But in all those cases, it has to be seen that the issue of priority or rather the issue of similarly situated employees who retired earlier and who could not approach this Court was not brought to the notice of the court. To that extent in cases requiring modification/clarification, it is for the K.S.R.T.C. to take appropriate steps. 7. Taking into consideration the present poor financial conditions of K.S.R.T.C. there will be a direction that the employees who retire should be paid at least 50% of the benefits excepting Provident Fund and Staff Welfare Fund within a period of six months from the date of retirement and balance 50% within another six months. True, going by the statutory provisions and settled legal principles, the employees are entitled to get the benefits in lump and much earlier. But these directions are issued, in the deplorable condition of the financial situation of the K.S.R.T.C. to which there cannot be any demur. In no case, the pensionary benefits as indicated above, shall be delayed more than an year. This, of course, is subject to a condition that there is no departmental/ judicial proceedings pending against the employee so as to withhold the payment of pensionary benefits. 8. The K.S.R.T.C. shall, immediately, prepare a priority list, as observed above, as far as the disbursement of the pensionary benefits is concerned and a copy of the list shall be made available in each District Transport Office on or before 17.8.2001. The District Transport Officer should permit the retired employees to verify the particulars in the list. Any objection to the list should be preferred through the District Transport Officer within a month thereafter and the same should be considered within another one month. The list thus published shall be updated once in six months. 9. As far as the employees who have already retired from service and to whom gratuity and commuted value of pension are not paid, the K.S.R.T.C. is given time upto 15th December, 2001 in the facts and circumstances of the case. The list thus published shall be updated once in six months. 9. As far as the employees who have already retired from service and to whom gratuity and commuted value of pension are not paid, the K.S.R.T.C. is given time upto 15th December, 2001 in the facts and circumstances of the case. This does not mean that K.S.R.T.C. is given time upto 15.12.2001 for all cases; time is given to enable K.S.R.T.C. to pay up the arrears in a phased manner. The payment should be only on the basis of the priority list maintained by the K.S.R.T.C. In the case of retired employees, in any case, the monthly pension should be paid to them within one month from the date of their retirement. In the matter of date of applicability of the pay revision arrears as to whether it is 1.3.1997 or 1.11.1999, it will depend on the orders to be issued by the Division Bench in pending Writ Appeals. Original Petitions are disposed of as above.