Terminal benefits and leave encashment are not discretionary bounties but vested property rights under the Constitution. Withholding such dues without legal authority violates Article 300A, and employers are liable to pay these amounts with interest to the entitled legal heirs.

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 READ WITH THE ARTICLE 21 AND 300A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT TO RELEASE ALL THE PENDING DUES OF LATE PRAKASH DURGEKAR WITH INTEREST AT THE PREVAILING SBI MCLR RATES AMOUNTING TO RUPEES SIX LAKHS FIFTY SIX THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED TWENTY-TWO TO THE LEGAL HEIR OF THE DECEASED EMPLOYEE THE MOTHER OF THE PETITIONER WHO IS THE WIFE OF THE DECEASED EMPLOYEE OF KFDC MR. PRAKASH C DURGEKAR IN PURSUANCE OF LEGAL NOTICE AT ANNX-C AND ETC.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

ORAL ORDER

In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

“1. The Respondent may be directed to release all the pending dues of late Prakash Durgekar with interest at the prevailing SBIMCLR rates amounting to Rupees Six lakhs fifty six thousand three hundred twenty-two to the legal heir of the deceased employee the mother of the Petitioner who is the wife of the deceased employee of KFDC Mr Prakash C Durgekar in pursuance of the Legal Notice dated 27.03.2024 placed at Annexure C”

2. The Hon’ble Court may be pleased to consider directing the respondents to give a compassionate employment to the petitioner, for the untimely demise of his father.

3. Hon’ble Court may be pleased to grant any other prayer to uphold the justice”.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent No.1 and learned AGA for respondent No.2 and perused the material on record.

3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that petitioner is the son of one late Prakash C. Durgekar, who retired on 31.05.2015. Prior to his expiry on 20.06.2022, the said Prakash C. Durgekar addressed several communications/letters/representations to respondent No.1 for settlement of his pending dues which was preceded by a communication dated 05.10.2015 addressed to the petitioner's father by the respondent No.1, whereby, it was stated that petitioner would be entitled to the pending dues. Subsequently, the aforesaid Prakash C. Durgekar having expired on 20.06.2022, the petitioner and his mother submitted representations as well as issued a legal notice, despite which the respondents did not clear the pending dues payable to the petitioner which is on account of the demise of his father and as such, petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition.

4. In support of his submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance upon order of this Court in the case of H. Channaiah v. The Chief Executive Officer and Others in W.P.No.5016/2024 dated 25.04.2024 which reads as hereunder:-

“The petitioner, who dedicatedly served as a Waterman in the office of respondent No.3 from 29.8.1979 until his superannuation on 31.1.2013, seeks redressal for non-payment of earned leave encashment by the Grama Panchayath.

2. Upon the petitioner's retirement, the Accountant General's office meticulously prepared a detailed statement encompassing the petitioner's service data and the pension payable. Subsequently, the Chief Executive Officer of Zilla Panchayath and the Taluka Executive Officer of Pavagada Taluka Panchayath issued directives emphasizing the urgency of settling the petitioner's earned leave encashment.

3. Regrettably, despite the clear directives, the Grama Panchayath released only a fraction of the earned leave amounting to Rs.70,000/-, leaving an outstanding balance of Rs.1,32,200/-.

4. The Grama Panchayath, in its response, raised objections to the petitioner's claim, disputing his employment status. The Grama Panchayath conten