IMPORTANT POINT
Employees have a valuable right to timely payment of retiral dues and gratuity, and culpable delay in disbursement must be penalized with the payment of interest.

ORDER :

1. The instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner against the action on the part of the respondent authorities whereby the arrears of salary, amount of gratuity and other retiral dues were not paid to the petitioner by the respondent authorities.

2. Brief facts of the case as mentioned in the petition, are that the petitioner was working as a manager under respondent No. 2 and posted at Raipur office. While working in the said department, on 08.03.2002, he was suspended due to some alleged irregularities. Petitioner filed the petition challenging the suspension order dated 08.03.2002 before the Labour Court Raipur, under section 31(3) read with section 62 of the M.P./C.G. Industrial Dispute Act. Vide order dated 20.02.2009 (Annexure P/1), learned Labour Court allowed the petition of the petitioner quashing the suspension order dated 08.03.2002. In compliance of the Labour Court’s order dated 20.02.2009 (Annexure P/1), on 19.03.2009 (Annexure P/2), the petitioner made representation to the Secretary of the department for joining of his duty. On 16.06.2009 (Annexure P/3), the petitioner made representation to the Commissioner, Provident Fund office for payment of total amount of Rs. 1,08,584/- under various heads. Against the order dated 20.02.2009 (Annexure P/1) passed by the learned Labour Court, respondent No.2 preferred an appeal before the State Industrial Court, Raipur (C.G.) which was rejected vide order dated 14.10.2011 (Annexure P/4) confirming the order of the Labour Court. In the meantime, the petitioner attended the superannuation age and retired on 30.09.2010. On 30.12.2011 (Annexure P/5), the petitioner made representation to the Administrator of Gram Seva Samiti, Raipur for granting all retiral dues as well as arrears of salary. On 30.12.2011 (Annexure P/6), the petitioner made representation to the Secretary of Gram Seva Samiti, Raipur for granting of gratuity amount of Rs. 1,43,715/- as well as arrears of salary.

3. On 05.03.2012 (Annexure P/7), the petitioner made representation to the authorities for granting a sum of Rs. 6,44,300/- including gratuity, provident fund, family pension fund and other retiral dues as well as arrears of salary between the period 01.04.2002 and 30.09.2010. Thereafter, the petitioner filed petition i.e. WP(S) No. 2047 of 2012 before this Court and due to mistake the State of Chhattisgarh was made a party. Therefore, vide order dated 06.08.2012 (Annexure P/8), this Court permitted the petitioner to withdraw the petition with liberty to file a better petition. Hence, this petition has been filed by the petitioner for following reliefs:-

“10.1 That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ and direct the respondents to grant the gratuity amount to petitioner & arrears of salary of Rs.6,44,300/- with interest @ 18% in the interest of justice.

10.2 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus to the respondents and direct that they may give the all retiral dues to the petitioner.

10.3 This Hon’ble Court may further be pleased to pass an appropriate order or issue writ as deemed fit under the facts and circumstances of the case.”

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has retired on 30.09.2010 from the office of respondent No.2 on attaining the age of superannuation. On 20.02.2009 (Annexure P/1), learned Labour Court allowed the petition filed by the petitioner quashing the suspension order dated 08.03.2002. In compliance of the said order, the petitioner joined the office on 19.03.2009. Petitioner made several representations to the respondent authorities for granting of arrears of salary of Rs. 6,44,300/- and gratuity amount Rs. 1,43,715/- as well as provident fund amount as calculated by the department but no amount was paid by the respondent authorities till date. This act of the respondents is against the principles of natural justice and is in