Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 851
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
N.NAGARESH, J
NARAYANARAJ.G – Appellant
Versus
MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 43506 OF 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.C.V.MILTON
For the Respondents: SRI.AKHIL SURESH
Retirees must receive their Provident Fund closure amounts regardless of the financial crisis faced by the employer.
Headnote:The Court analyzed the contribution structure of the General Provident Fund and concluded that the public utility cannot withhold payments owed to retirees due to financial distress. The petitioners contended that the Provident Fund is solely their contribution. The Court ruled that payment must be disbursed with interest, despite the financial state of the KSRTC.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. entitlement to provident fund closure amount after retirement. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. impending financial difficulties of ksrtc cited as a reason for non-payment. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
JUDGMENT
The petitioners, who are employees of the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC), are subscribers to the General Provident Fund. Though the petitioners retired from service, the closure amount payable under the Provident Fund has not been paid to the petitioners. Hence, the petitioners are before this Court.
2. The petitioners would contend that the Provident Fund is not a due like DCRG and Commuted Value of Pension. It is a fund constituted from contributions made by the employee alone. The employer is only a custodian of the fund. Hence, the employer has no authority to deny the payment of this fund after the retirement of the employee and utilising it for their own purposes.
3. Standing Counsel entered appearance on behalf of the respondents and resisted the writ petition. The Standing Counsel emphatically denied all the averments made by the petitioners in the writ petition. On behalf of the respondents, it is submitted that KSRTC is the largest Establishment in the State with 22313 employees and about 42205 pensioners. The Government as per letter dated 27.03.1984 authorised the KSRTC to pay pension to its employees as per part III of the Kerala State Service Rules and as such Pension Scheme of the employees of KSRTC was introduced with effect from 01.04.1984.
4. The KSRTC has been in a grave financial crisis for the past few years, incurring recurring losses and being unable to meet its essential expenses. As per the unaudited financial report, the loss of the KSTRC per year is more than ₹1314 Crores.
5. Considering the gravity of the financial constraints faced by KSRTC, including accumulated losses nearing ₹19,370 Crores and substantial pending liabilities towards employees and lenders, the prayer for emergent disbursement of the petitioners’ pensionary benefits, particularly Provident Fund closure, is fundamentally prejudicial. Allowing the petitioner’s demand for preferential consideration would not only undermine the established and currently followed seniority based disbursement scheme but would also precipitate a floodgate of litigation, thereby disrupting orderly financial management and the potential recovery of this essential public utility.
6. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel representing the respondents.
7. The grievance of the petitioners is regarding non- payment of General Provident Fund closure amount. General Provident Fund is constituted accepting the contributions made by the petitioners. It is the money of the petitioners. Therefore, the respondents will not be justified in denying the same stating that the KSRTC is in financial difficulties.
In the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to pay the Provident Fund closure amount to the petitioners with statutory interest within a period of three months.
