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

2022 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 98540

MADRAS HIGH COURT
Honourable Mr Justice D. KRISHNAKUMAR
CAPT. RC RAJAN – Appellant
Versus
THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF COAST – Respondent
WP/14440/2009



An employee who has completed more than 5 years of continuous service is entitled to gratuity under Section 4(1)(b) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, even if he resigns from service.

Headnote:

GRATUITY - PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, 1972 - SECTION 4(1)(B) - CCS (PENSION) RULES, 1972 - RULE 48 - RETIREMENT - RESIGNATION - ENTITLEMENT TO GRATUITY

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, an ex-Coast Guard officer, served for 16 years and resigned from service on compassionate grounds. He applied for gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, but his request was rejected by the respondent on the ground that he had not completed 20 years of qualifying service as required under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the petitioner was entitled to gratuity under Section 4(1)(b) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, as he had completed more than 5 years of continuous service. The court found that the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, were not applicable to the petitioner as he was not a government servant governed by those rules.

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on Section 4(1)(b) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, which provides that gratuity shall be payable to an employee on the termination of his employment after he has rendered continuous service for not less than five years. The court held that the petitioner had completed more than 5 years of continuous service and was therefore entitled to gratuity.

Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition and directed the respondent to settle the gratuity amount with appropriate interest in accordance with law within 12 weeks.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 10.01.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR

W.P.NO.14440 OF 2009

AND

M.P.NOS.1 AND 2 OF 2009

Capt.RC Rajan (Ex.Comdt 0080-E)

... Petitioner

.Vs.

The Director General of Coast Guard,

Tatrakshak Mukhalaya,

Coast Guard Head Quarters,

National Stadium Complex,

New Delhi- 110 001.

... Respondent

PRAYER:-

Writ petition filed under Section 226 of the Constitution of

India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for

the records relating to the order of the respondent in his

proceedings in OF/0303/0080-E, dated 11.05.2009 and quash the

same and consequently direct the respondent to release and

disburse the gratuity payable to the petitioner for his 16 long

years of service in Coast Guard.

For petitioner :

Mr.Balakrishnan

For Mr.Ravi

For Respondent :

Mr.T.L.Thirumalaisamy

Central Government

Standing Counsel

O R D E R

The Writ Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings

passed in OF/0303/0080-E, dated 11.05.2009, rejecting the

request for payment of gratuity and for a consequential

direction to the respondent to release and disburse the gratuity

amount payable to the petitioner for his 16 years of service as

Coast Guard.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2. It is the case of the petitioner that originally the

petitioner had joined service as Coast Guard in the year 1983

and served in the capacity of a Staff Pilot, Squadron Commander,

Commanding Officer, Instrument rating examiner and a Pilot

instructor. As such he had served 16 long years without any

break and the petitioner was awarded 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 petitioner had been put in very

meritorious service without any blemishes in record of service.

On completing his 16 years of service in the post of Coast

Guard, owing to pressing family compulsions, the petitioner

requested respondent, to accept his resignation. Accepting the

said letter of the resignation, the respondent had relieved the

petitioner w.e.f. 1st July 1999 on compassionate grounds.

Thereafter, the petitioner had applied for the disbursement of

gratuity on 09.07.2000. But to the shock and surprise, the

respondent by letter dated 26.07.2000, has informed that as per

the Rules the petitioner did not complete 20 years of qualifying

service in the department and therefore, as per Rule 26(1) of

CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, resignation from a service as post

entails forfeiture of past service. In view of the above, the

petitioner is not entitled for payment of any gratuity.

Challenging the aforesaid rejection order passed by the

respondent, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition

before this Court.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

respondent has rejected the request for gratuity in the light of

CCS (Pension) Rules 1972 and the said rule will not be

applicable to the petitioner. The petitioner had not sought for

any amount under the Pension Rule. As per Section 4(1) of the

Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 the gratuity shall be payable to

an employee in the termination of his employment after rendering

continuous service for not less than five years. Hence, the

petitioner is entitled for gratuity amount as he has completed

more than 5 years of continuous service. He further submitted

that the gratuity shall be payable even to the employee/

delinquent resigned from service provided he shall be put in

five years of continuous service. In this case, the petitioner

after serving 16 long years, on his own request, he was relieved

from service. Hence, the order impugned in this petition is

liable to be set aside.

4. The respondent filed counter affidavit stating that the

petitioner se

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