SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Tri) 53

HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA, AGARTALA
S. DATTA PURKAYASTHA, J.
 
Haripada Choudhury, Son of Lt. Naresh Bandhu Choudhury – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Tripura, To be represented by the Secretary, Department of Agriculture & Farmer’s Welfare, Govt. of Tripura and Ors. – Respondents
WP(C) No.233 of 2024, WP(C) No.234 of 2024, WP(C) No.235 of 2024, WP(C) No.236 of 2024, WP(C) No.237 of 2024. 
Decided On : 31-01-2025 

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. P. Roy Barman, Senior Advocate, Mr. S. Bhattacharjee, Advocate, Ms. A. Debbarma, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Mr. B. Majumder, Dy. SGI., Mr. D. Bhattacharya, Senior Advocate, Mr. Kohinoor N. Bhattacharya, G.A., Mr. D. Sarma, Addl. G.A.

Withholding gratuity post-retirement without notice or opportunity to contest alleged incorrect pay fixation is impermissible and deemed harsh.

Headnote:(A) Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 - Recovery of gratuity - Petitioners, employees of Agriculture Department, challenged withholding of 25% gratuity post-retirement due to alleged incorrect pay fixation - Court found withholding impermissible as it would be harsh and iniquitous, especially since no misrepresentation was involved. (Paras 24, 28)

(B) Principles of Natural Justice - Court emphasized that no reduction in pension or gratuity can occur without notice or opportunity to be heard, especially post-retirement. (Paras 7, 24)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners retired from service with 75% of gratuity released; 25% withheld due to alleged incorrect pay fixation. They sought release of withheld gratuity with interest. (Paras 2.1, 3.1, 4.1)

Findings of Court:
Recovery of gratuity was deemed harsh and impermissible; respondents directed to release withheld gratuity with interest. (Paras 28)

Issues: Whether withholding of gratuity based on alleged incorrect pay fixation is lawful and whether principles of natural justice were followed. (Paras 7, 24)

Ratio Decidendi: Court ruled that recovery of gratuity is impermissible without proper notice and opportunity for the petitioners to contest the alleged incorrect pay fixation. (Paras 24, 28)

Result: Respondents directed to release 25% of gratuity with interest within 8 weeks.

JUDGMENT :

S. DATTA PURKAYASTHA, J.

The commacts and identical nature of disputes being involved, all the writ petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. All the petitioners were employees of Agriculture Department under Government of Tripura.

[2.1] In WP(C) No.233 of 2024, the petitioner retired from service attaining the age of superannuation on 30.06.2023 from the post of UDC. On his retirement, 75% of his gratuity amount was released and rest 25% was withheld. Initially, the petitioner joined as LDC on 15.06.1987 in the service under respondent No.2 and after completion of 10 years of service, he was given first gradation i.e. CAS-I on 15.06.1997 and on completion of 17 years of service in the same post, he was also granted second gradation i.e. CAS-II on 15.06.2004 and lastly, he was given third ACP benefit on 01.04.2015. He was, thereafter, promoted to the post of UDC (Ad-hoc) vide office order dated 23.09.2021. At the time of retirement, his last basic pay was shown to be Rs.62,600/-.

[2.2] It is alleged that for fixation of his pensionary benefits, his service book was sent to the office of AG (A&E), Agartala and vide letter dated 10.08.2023 (Annexure 5), the Senior Accounts Officer of the office of Accountant General (A&E), it was stated that on scrutiny of service book, his fixation of pay w.e.f. 01.01.1998 to 31.03.2017 was found to be incorrect. It was also further reflected in the said letter that pension and commutation of pension were already released in his favour on the basis of his last pay of Rs.62,600/- as per their calculation without the benefit of ad-hoc promotion and it was also stated that 25% of gratuity would be released on reply received from the office of Superintendent of Agriculture, Dukli Agri Sub-Division, Agartala. On 09.10.2023, another letter (Annexure 6) was sent by said Senior Accounts Officer to said Superintendent of Agriculture whereby service book of the petitioner was returned from the office of the Accountant General with a request to review the matter and to make revised regulation of pay in the service book under proper attestation and with preparation of due and drawn statement of overdrawal of pay, allowances, leave salary by the petitioner.

[2.3] Thereafter, the petitioner sent one representation to the respondents dated 26.12.2023 (Annexure 7) requesting them to release his rest amount of gratuity with interest. The Senior Accounts Officer also forwarded said representation to the Superintendent of Agriculture vide his letter dated 25.01.2024 (Annexure 8) for appropriate action from his end with further reflection of the fact that the pension and commutation of pension were already authorized by the office of AG to the petitioner on the basis of last pay of Rs.62,600/- and that withholding of DCRG would be settled on receipt of reply from the department. Under such circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petition for release of said 25% of gratuity i.e. Rs.2,50,000/- with interest @9% per annum and also to quash the letters dated 10.08.2023 and 09.10.2023.

[3.1] In WP(C) No.234 of 2024, similarly the petitioner retired from the service on 31.01.2023 from the post of UDC (Ad- hoc basis) and on her retirement, 75% of the gratuity was released but rest 25% of gratuity amounting to Rs.2,50,000/- was withheld on the ground, as reflected by Senior Accounts Officer vide his letter dated 07.08.2023 (Annexure 6), that fixation of her pay w.e.f. 15.06.1997 under ROP 1999 was found to be incorrect. By said letter, the Senior Accounts Officer requested the Superintendent of Agriculture, Bishalgarh Agri Sub-Division to review the matter and to prepare necessary due drawn statement of overdrawal. It was however, stated also that the commutation of pension in favour of said petitioner was released on the basis of her last pay of Rs.62,600/- as per calculation of the office of Accountant General without giving the benefit of ad-hoc promotion. [3.2] The

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top