Unauthorized occupation of quarters can justify the withholding of retirement benefits.

Petitioner seeks writ of mandamus to direct the Respondents 4 & 5 to disburse the amount due to the Petitioner pursuant to her retirement from the service as HeadMistress in the Neyveli Lignite Corporation Girls Higher Secondary School.

2. Petitioner was employed as Head Mistress in Girls Higher Secondary School which is under the control of Respondents 4 and 5. The Petitioner retired on attaining superannuation as Head Mistress on 31.05.2001. Case of Petitioner is that on her retirement, State Government has sanctioned a sum of Rs.1,33,865/- towards earn leave and half pay leave encashment and a sum of more than Rs.one lakh towards retiral benefits.

3. Case of the Petitioner is that these amounts have been withheld by Respondents 4 and 5 without any justification. In the letter dated 21.04.2001, the Petitioner has requested the Respondents to disburse the amount which is due to her and there was no action on the part of Respondents 4 and 5 to disburse the amount due to the Petitioner.

4. The Respondents have filed counter contending as under:

As per the rules for allotment of quarters in the Corporation an employee after his/her retirement can be allowed to retain the quarters only for 4 months on subsidized rent etc. As the Petitioners husband, Alphonse has failed to surrender the quarter immediately after the expiry of 4 months, action was taken against him under the provisions of Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971. The Petitioners husband without vacating the quarters, has filed a Civil Suit along with Petitioner before the Sub Court, Cuddalore against the Corporation praying a decree for permanent injunction restraining the Corporation from interfering with their peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Corporation quarters and also for mandatory injunction directing the Corporation to allot D type quarters to the Petitioner and obtained an exparte order of interim injunction, restraining the Corporation from evicting both of them from the quarters and also not to interfere with their peaceful enjoyment and occupation of the quarters. Taking advantage of interim injunction Petitioner continued to occupy the quarters unauthorized with all amenities of water, electricity etc. But Petitioner and her husband has never cared to remit allied charges for the said quarters from 1993. As a result a sum of Rs.2,68,600.15 is due towards the rental and other dues from the Petitioner to the NLC. As per rules, NLC is entitled to withhold the amount towards the rental arrears payable by the Petitioner.

5. The learned counsel for the Petitioner Mr.V.C.Janarthanan, has contended that the Petitioner is not connected with allotment of quarters and NLC ought to have proceeded against the Petitioners husband. The learned counsel further argued that the action of the Management is in violation of principles of natural justice and having issued certificate that no charges are due pending from the Petitioner, NLC cannot seek to deduct the amount from retiral benefits payable to the Petitioner. It was further urged that when no quarters was allotted to the Petitioner NLC was not justified in seeking to recover the arrears from the Petitioner.

6. Drawing the attention of the Court to the filing of the suit and the amount due and payable by the Petitioner, Mr.N.A.K.Sharma, learned counsel for NLC submitted that after retirement of Petitioners husband, the couple refused to vacate the quarters and taking advantage of the interim injunction granted by civil court, they continued to be in unauthorised occupation of quarters. Learned counsel further submitted that both husband and wife has filed civil suit in O.S.No.314/94 Sub Court, Cuddalore (O.S.No.181/96, District Magistrate Court, Neyveli) question of separate identity does not arise. The learned counsel would also submit that gratuity and other terminal benefits were already been paid to the Petitioner and only HRA and certain other amount are withheld