Employee's retirement benefits and gratuity are valuable legal rights; withholding of dues based on unauthorized property occupancy is unjustified when employee has not been residing there.

JUDGMENT :

S.K. MISHRA, J.

1. This is the 3^rd round legal battle at the instance of the Petitioner before this Court to get his after retiral benefits. The Petitioner, who was working as Mazdoor under the Opposite Party No.1 and availed early retirement under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) introduced by the Opposite Party-Management in the year 2012, is yet to receive his Retirement Benefit Fund (RBF) as well as other dues, as has been detailed in the Writ Petition.

2. The background facts which led to filing of this Writ Petition is that the Petitioner had earlier approached this Court in W.P.(C) No.6176 of 2016 challenging the notice dated 15.01.2016 issued by the Opposite Party No.1 to the Petitioner to evict him from Plot No. GJC-9 alleging therein that he is in unauthorized possession of the said plot and as not releasing his after retiral benefits on the said plea.

3. This Court disposed of the Writ Petition at the stage of admission on 11^th October, 2017. The said order is reproduced below.

“Heard learned counsel for the parties.

This writ petition has been filed assailing the order under Annexure-6 issued by the Management Committee directing the petitioner to vacate/clear the plot no.GJC-9 under his occupation within fifteen days from the date of issue of such notice.

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusal of the averments made in paragraph-7 of this petition, this Court finds, the petitioner has a clear statement that he has already vacated the quarter by handing over possession of the same to the Paradeep Port Trust on compliance of the direction contained in Annexure-1.

Under the circumstance and for the petitioners claim that he has already vacated the quarter, nothing survives to be decided in the matter but considering the further submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has not been paid with the dues he is entitled, in the event the petitioner has vacated the quarters and there is no other impediment, the Management Committee may take decision with regard to release of the dues of the petitioner within a time frame.

The Civil Misc. Petition stands disposed of with the above direction.” (Emphasis supplied)

4. Against the said order passed by the coordinate Bench, the Opposite Party Management filed RVWPET No.249 of 2017 for review of the said order passed in W.P.(C) No.6176 of 2016, so also CONTC No.1744 of 2017 and both the said applications filed by the Opposite Party were dismissed.

5. The Petitioner filed CONTC No.564 of 2018 against the Opposite Party for non compliance of Order dated 11^th October, 2017 passed in W.P.(C) No.6176 of 2016, which was disposed of on 9^th May, 2018 with a direction to the Opposite Party that in the event, the representation at the instance of the Petitioner is still pending, the same shall be disposed of in accordance with law.

6. After disposal of the said contempt petition, the Petitioner again filed representation on 22^nd May, 2018 before the Opposite Party for release of his legitimate dues.

7. Despite such direction given by this Court, as the Opposite Party kept the said representation of the Petitioner pending for indefinite period, he being an old and retired person and badly in need of money for his medical