Retiral benefits, including gratuity and pension, constitute vested property rights under Article 300A; delayed payment breaches the right to livelihood under Article 21, and employers must timely settle these dues.

Judgment :

Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J.

1. The writ petitioner, a permanent employee of the respondent no. 2 company who had risen to the post of Superintendent, retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31st May, 2008. According to him, his service record was unblemished and he had retired to the full satisfaction of his superiors.

2. It was the petitioner’s case that upon retirement he was paid his provident fund dues and gratuity, but the computation of such gratuity, as also his leave salary, was made only on the basis of his last drawn basic pay of Rs. 8,400/-, without reckoning the dearness allowance component. He asserted that such calculation was contrary to law, since the Government itself had issued orders in September, 2009 implementing the recommendations of the 5th Pay Commission, granting revised pay scales with retrospective effect from 1st January, 2006 to 31st March, 2008 notionally, and with cash benefit from 1st April, 2008. As the petitioner had retired in May, 2008, he was entitled to all retiral and terminal benefits on the basis of such revised rates, but his dues were wrongly settled on the basis of pre-revised pay.

3. The petitioner contended in terms of Order No.6068-WT/TR/O/7T-14/09 dated 30th November, 2010, his claims for difference of gratuity, arrear of revised leave salary, and arrear of pension stood crystallised, and he legitimately expected prompt disbursement thereof. However, the authorities remained recalcitrant and failed to take any effective steps despite his written representations dated 11th January, 2013 and 25th March, 2013 before the competent authorities.

4. The petitioner stated being left remediless, he was constrained to approach this Court by filing W.P. No.796 of 2014, which was disposed of by order dated 8th January, 2015, directing the respondent no. 2 to consider his representation, grant him a hearing, and pass a reasoned order in the light of the circular by 31st March, 2015. Pursuant thereto, while the respondents released the remaining gratuity and leave salary in terms of the revised pay, the same was done without awarding any interest, and the arrears of revised pension and arrear ROPA benefits were left unpaid.

5. It was further pleaded that the petitioner, having failed to elicit compliance, sought information under Section 6 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 on 10th December, 2015 regarding his arrear retiral benefits. However, the respondents remained silent and did not respond.

6. The petitioner contended that his claims towards interest on delayed payment of gratuity and leave salary, arrears of pension at the revised rate, and arrear ROPA constitute his vested property rights within the meaning of Article 300A of the Constitution of India, and the non- payment thereof was arbitrary, illegal, and contrary to law. Withholding of such lawful dues without assigning reasons amounted to failure to discharge statutory obligations, which resulted in infringement of his right to livelihood under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

7. The Learned Advocate representing the petitioner submitted the interest on delayed retiral dues, arrear pension and arrear capital ROPA constituted property rights within the meaning of Article 300A of the Constitution and the same could not be denied to be disbursed in favour of the petitioner.

8. Moreover, non-payment of the aforesaid interest was illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The respondent- authorities deliberately failed to discharge their legal duties wh