Employee maintains entitlement to benefits despite dismissal when employer's action lacks tribunal approval.

Judgment / Order :

MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL, J.

1.This writ petition is filed by the petitioner-workman seeking a direction to the respondents to release his service benefits as also the post retiral benefits treating him to be continue in service with interest at the rate 9% per annum.

2. The relevant facts in brief are that while serving as a Conductor with the respondent-Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, the petitioner was served with a charge-sheet dated 10.08.1999 with allegation of carrying passengers without ticket wherein, an order of dismissal from service was passed on 28.11.2002. The application filed by the respondent-Corporation under Section 33 (2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, ”the Act of 1947”) seeking approval of the order of dismissal came to be dismissed by the learned Industrial Tribunal, Jaipur (for short, “learned Industrial Tribunal”) vide order dated 28.02.2024. Alleging that despite dismissal of the application filed under Section 33 (2)(b), the respondents did not pay him the service benefits till he attained the age of superannuation, i.e., 30.09.2015 and thereafter, the retiral benefits, this writ petition is filed.

3. Reiterating the averments made in the writ petition, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that rejection of the application filed by the respondent-Corporation under Section 33 (2)(b) seeking approval of the order of dismissal amounts to as if no order of dismissal was ever passed and in view thereof, he is entitled for all the service benefits as also post retiral benefits on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.09.2015. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition be allowed and the respondent- Corporation be directed to release the aforesaid benefits with interest at the rate 9% per annum.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents, relying on a coordinate Bench order of this Court dated 11.02.2025 passed in the case of Shyam Lal Sharma Vs. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation and Others: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10520/2021, would submit that since the petitioner did not work from the date the dismissal order was passed till he attained the age of superannuation, he is not entitled to get any actual benefit for this period on the principle of “No Work No Pay”; but, notional benefits only. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition be disposed of in terms thereof.

Heard. Considered.

5. The relevant facts are not in dispute and are in very narrow compass. The learned Industrial Tribunal, vide its order dated 28.02.2024, dismissed the application filed by the respondent- Corporation under Section 33 (2)(b) of the Act of 1947 seeking approval of the dismissal order dated 28.11.2002.

6. Now the question is of entitlement of the petitioner for reinstatement, payment of consequential service benefits and retiral dues.

7. So far as retiral dues are concerned, entitlement of the petitioner for the same is not disputed even by the learned counsel for the respondents. Further, since, the petitioner has retired in the interregnum on attaining the age of superannuation, there is no occasion of his reinstatement after rejection of the application under Section 33 (2)(b) vide order dated 28.02.2024.

8. Objection of the learned counsel for the respondents qua the entitlement of the petitioner for payment of actual monetary benefits from the date of dismissal of service till he attained the age of superannuation is based solely on the order dated 11.02.2025 passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Shyam Lal Sharma (supra) wherein, it was held as under:

“7. Perusal of the record indicates that a charge-sheet was served upon the petitioner for taking certain passengers without ticket and after holding some inquiry, a decision was taken by the respondents to terminate the services of the petitioner and accordingly, a decision was taken on 24.05.2002 in this regard. After that an application under Section 33 (2)(B) of the Act of 1947 was sub