Back
2025 Supreme(Mad) 2196
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.S. SUNDAR, R. HEMALATHA, JJ.
The Director General of Coast Guard - Appellant
Versus
Capt.RC Rajan (Ex.Comdt 0080-E) - Respondent
W.A.No.1173 of 2022 and C.M.P.Nos.20625 of 2022 & 2539 of 2024
Decided on : 29-04-2025
Advocate Appeared :
For the Appellant : Mr.ARL.Sundaresan, Additional Solicitor General assisted by Mr.J.Madana Gopal Rao Senior Panel Counsel
For the Respondent : Mr.Rajagopal Senior Counsel for Mr.Vivekanandh
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr.ARL.Sundaresan, Additional Solicitor General assisted by Mr.J.Madana Gopal Rao Senior Panel Counsel
For the Respondent: Mr.Rajagopal Senior Counsel for Mr.Vivekanandh
The court ruled that a premature release from service is equivalent to resignation, thus forfeiting gratuity eligibility under the CCS (Pension) Rules, as the respondent was not considered an 'employee' under the Payment of Gratuity Act.
Headnote:
(A) Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 - Sections 2(e) and 4(1) - Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 - Rule 26 - Gratuity entitlement - Respondent, a former Coast Guard officer, sought gratuity after premature release from service; appellant denied based on resignation classification - Court held that respondent not covered under Payment of Gratuity Act due to CCS (Pension) Rules applicability, which entails forfeiture of past service upon resignation. (Paras 10, 12, 16)
(B) Premature Release - Definition and implications - Premature release on request considered equivalent to resignation, affecting gratuity eligibility under CCS (Pension) Rules. (Paras 15, 16)
Facts of the case:
The respondent served in the Coast Guard for 16 years and sought premature release due to personal circumstances, later denied gratuity by the appellant citing resignation rules.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the respondent's premature release was equivalent to resignation, thus forfeiting gratuity eligibility under CCS (Pension) Rules.
Issues: The main issues were whether the respondent was entitled to gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act and the classification of his premature release as resignation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the respondent was not an 'employee' under the Payment of Gratuity Act and that his premature release constituted a resignation, leading to forfeiture of past service.
Result: Writ Appeal allowed; order of the learned Single Judge set aside.
JUDGMENT :
S.S. SUNDAR, J.
This intra Court Appeal is to set aside the order of the learned Single Judge, dated 10.01.2022, in W.P.No.14440 of 2009, allowing the writ petition filed by the respondent to quash the proceedings of the appellant dated 11.05.2009 impugned in the writ petition and for consequential reliefs.
2. Brief facts that are necessary for the disposal of this Writ Appeal are as follows :
The respondent was a Pilot in Jet Airways. Originally, he joined the services of Coast Guard in August, 1983. He served in the Coast Guard in various capacities like Staff Pilot, Squadron Commander, Commanding Officer, Instrument Rating Examiner and Pilot Instructor. After putting in 16 long years of service without any break and having 5000 hours of flying in his service, the respondent/writ petitioner was awarded the DGCG Commendation, The Tatrakshak Medal for meritorious service, The Proficiency Award and The Safety Award for accident/incident free flying during the service in Coast Guard. The respondent had put in 16 long years of service in Coast Guard. It is stated by the respondent that, after completing the 16th year of service in Coast Guard, the respondent, due to personal family circumstances, requested for transfer in Chennai. It is stated further that, since his request for transfer was not heeded to, the respondent wanted to voluntarily retire from service. It is further stated that the respondent was allowed on premature release/discharge from the service voluntarily on compassionate grounds with effect from 01.07.1999. It is further stated that the respondent's request for premature release had been approved by the Government with effect from 01.07.1999. However, the respondent's request for disbursement of gratuity was rejected by the appellant by proceedings dated 26.07.2000. Thereafter, the respondent had submitted various representations and finally, the respondent submitted his request on 25.04.2009 seeking payment of gratuity. The request for payment of gratuity was rejected by the appellant by the order dated 11.05.2009 impugned in the writ petition, for the following reasons :
“2. You were released pre-maturely on your request on compassionate grounds under Rule 27 of CG (General) Rules, 1986. Your premature release/leaving service before completion of 20 years of qualifying service do not provide for pension/gratuity to you. In this regard, premature release/discharge on own request is considered as 'resignation' which entails forfeiture of past service and non-entitlement for any gratuity as per Rule 26 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. Your case was further taken up with PCDA (N) & PCDA (P) for re-examination (copy enclosed). However, the same was not accepted by PCDA (P) due to the above reasons.
3. It is reiterated that your premature discharge from service on compassionate grounds on own request is equivalent to resignation for all practical purposes. Hence, your request for payment of gratuity cannot be reconsidered.”
3. Challenging the same, the respondent filed the writ petition in W.P.No.14440 of 2009.
4. The writ petition was opposed by the appellant on the ground that the writ petitioner is covered by Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 , (hereinafter referred to as “CCS (Pension) Rules” for brevity) and hence, the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 , is not applicable. It is further stated that, as an officer in the Coast Guard, the writ petitioner cannot be said to be an employee within the meaning of Section 2(e) of Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 , and that therefore, the writ petitioner is not at all entitled to the benefits available under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 . It is then stated that, under Rule 26 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, the writ petitioner, having resigned from service, is not entitled to gratuity as such resignation entails forfeiture of past services.
5. However, the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition by order dated 10.01.2022, holding that the writ petitioner
