SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(AP) 6

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
Maheswara Rao Kuncheam, J.
Tella Bhaskara Rao, S/o. Sri Ramulu, Hindu - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh Rep by its Principal, Secretary, Department of Cooperation - Respondents
Writ Petition No: 20248 of 2015
Decided On : 02-01-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: A Padma
For the Respondent: GP FOR COOPERATION (AP), K V Rajasree, V Uma Devi

Retirement benefits, including gratuity and leave encashment, are statutory rights under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, mandating timely payment regardless of the employer's financial situation.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 - Non-payment of arrears of salary and terminal benefits to petitioner post-retirement declared illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner entitled to gratuity and leave encashment after 5 years of service, with no legal impediments to payment. The respondents are directed to release the dues with interest. (Paras 30, 4, 17, 18)

(B) Statutory Rights - Terminal benefits are a statutory right under Article 300-A, integral to the right to livelihood under Article 21. Non-payment due to financial incapacity is not a valid defense (Paras 26, 29).

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a retired employee of a cooperative bank, sought arrears of salary and terminal benefits after serving without blemish for decades. His retirement benefits had not been released despite multiple representations and acknowledgments of liability by the respondents. The amount owed totaled Rs.2,28,260. (Paras 2, 4, 5)

Findings of Court:
The non-payment to the petitioner, a senior citizen, was unjustified and violated statutory obligations. The entitlement to gratuity is protected by law, with specific provisions for interest on delayed payment. (Paras 18, 20)

Issues: Whether withholding of the petitioner’s retirement benefits was legally permissible and the obligation of respondents in circumstances of financial incapacity. (Paras 14, 29)

Ratio Decidendi: The Court reaffirmed the right to gratuity following superannuation, emphasizing that entitlements cannot be denied based on the employer's financial challenges. Such benefits are protected under law, and timely payment is mandated. (Paras 21, 27)

Result: Writ petition allowed; respondents directed to release benefits with interest. (Paras 30)

Table of Content
1. petitioner seeks unpaid benefits and salary. (Para 1 , 2 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. petitioner did not receive payments causing difficulties. (Para 3 , 7)
3. respondents argue financial incapacity. (Para 8 , 9)
4. court's analysis of non-payment validity. (Para 11 , 14)
5. statutory rights of gratuity and payment timelines. (Para 17 , 19 , 20)
6. rights to interest on delayed gratuity payments. (Para 21 , 22 , 24)
7. court orders payments and compliance timeline. (Para 30 , 31)

ORDER :

Maheswara Rao Kuncheam, J.

The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following main relief:

“to declare the action of the respondents though the petitioner is entitled for arrears of salary of Rs.2,28,260/- and gratuity, encashment of earned leave not releasing retiral benefits to the petitioner till date without any valid reasons prolonging the issue with a malafide intention as illegal, arbitrary and void and consequently direct the respondents to release the arrears of salary and terminal benefits with interest and to pass…..”

2. Heard Smt.Akella Padma, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3. Ms.Umadevi, learned Standing Counsel appeared for respondents 4 and 5. Perused the material on record.

3. The petitioner was initially appointed as decadarised Secretary in the 3rd respondent Sambara Agricultural Cooperative Society, Vizianagaram, which is under the control of the 4th respondent/ District Cooperative Central Bank Ltd., Vizianagaram (in short 'DCCB' ) on 28.06.1977. The petitioner worked in various cooperative societies at Vizianagaram District and while he was working in 2nd respondent society as paid secretary, he was promoted as Special Category Employee on 01.03.2009 in 4th respondent bank and rendered his services without any blemish.

4. The petitioner attained superannuation on 30.09.2011 while he was working as a Cashier at Telam Branch of 4th respondent bank. Though the petitioner discharged his duties without any remark and retired from service in the year 2011, he was not paid the salaries for 14 months from May 2004 to June 2005 and for 21 months from June 2007 to February 2009, totaling to Rs.2,28,260/- apart from his terminal benefits, which have to be paid by the respondents.

5. In this connection, the petitioner submitted a representation to the respondents for payment of his arrears of salary and also retiral benefits, such as, gratuity, earned leave encashment and provident fund etc. On such representation, the 2nd respondent society passed a resolution on 12.05.2014 whereby requesting the 4th respondent bank to advance the amounts payable to the petitioner. The said resolution further reveals that petitioner has not involved in any financial irregularities during his services.

6. Even prior to this, the District Cooperative Officer, Vizianagaram, addressed a letter dated 03.10.2009 to the 2nd respondent society, directing to take necessary action for payment of arrears of salary pending against the petitioner by following the existing bye-laws and rules in vogue. But, till the date of filing of the writ petition, the petitioner was paid neither the arrears of salary nor terminal benefits of gratuity, leave encashment of earned leave and provident fund. Hence, having been left with no other efficacious remedy, the petitioner, who is a senior citizen being deprived of his terminal benefits i.e., gratuity and leave encashment, has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, by filing the instant writ petition.

7. It is the further case of the petitioner that he being a senior citizen, non- release of the terminal benefits i.e., gratuity and leave encashment, etc, would cause multifarious problems and adversely affect him and his family members physically, psychologically and fiscally and has put his right to life in peril.

8. On 02.11.2016, the 2nd respondent filed its counte

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top