Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 65572
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P. Dhanabal, J
National Institute of Technical Teachers Training and Research Chennai Society – Appellant
Versus
M. Rajakumar – Respondent
W.P.No.21719 of 2022
For the Appellants/Petitioners: M/s. A.L. Ganthimathi, Senior Counsel, for M/s. S. Meenakshi
For the Respondents: Mr. S. T. Varadarajulu
The court ruled deductions from retirement benefits must comply with the legal framework and prior court orders, ensuring fair calculation of entitlements.
Headnote:(A) Article 226 of the Constitution of India - Writ of Certiorari - Challenge to the award passed by Labour Court regarding computation of retirement benefits - The Labour Court awarded a sum of Rs.7,34,561/- without interest to respondent, with entitlement to interest at 9% for delay - Management deducted amounts towards license fee and other dues, which were contested by respondent as unlawful. (Paras 1-16)
(B) Retirement Benefits - Computation of retirement benefits and liabilities in the context of disciplinary proceedings - Respondent's entitlement upheld with modifications regarding permissible deductions. (Paras 7-15)
Facts of the case:
The respondent had a prolonged service period and underwent disciplinary actions leading to compulsory retirement. Following several litigations, an order regarding retirement benefits was issued which the management partially complied with, leading to the writ petition.
Findings of Court:
The Court found that the deductions made from the respondent's benefits were not fully justified and directed management to reimburse the remaining amount, while allowing some deductions related to conveyance.
Issues: The legality of deductions from retirement benefits and compliance with prior court orders regarding entitlements.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that while some deductions were legitimate, others were not justified according to the prevailing rules on retirement benefits and the specific terms of the prior order.
Result: Writ Petition partly allowed with modifications to the Labour Court's order.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to award of labour court regarding retirement benefits. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. details on respondent's service history and prior disciplinary actions. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. computation of amounts due and basis for deductions. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. justification of deductions based on rules and previous orders. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. court's rulings on legitimate deductions and required compensation. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 6. final decision on allowances and compliance by petitioner. (Para 15 , 17) |
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been preferred against the award dated 08.07.2022 passed by the I-Additional Labour Court, Chennai in C.P.No.145 of 2019 and to quash the same.
2. The short facts necessary for the disposal of this Writ Petition are as follows:
i) The respondent joined the services of the petitioner's institute as a Technician Grade III on 30.04.1986. He was subsequently promoted to various posts, and while serving as Foreman in the pay scale with a basic pay of Rs.11,240/-, he was placed under suspension, along with certain co-employees, and he enjoyed the promotion and seniority.
ii) The respondent remained under continuous suspension on 13.02.2002, 23.07.2002 and 12.11.2002, under Rule 10(5)(b) of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 1965, (in short “CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965”) pending disciplinary proceeding. A show-cause notice dated 25.02.2003 was issued proposing penalty. The said proceeding was challenged by the respondent in I.D. No.18 of 2004, which was dismissed by award dated 09.09.2004.
iii) The said award was assailed by the respondent in W.P.No.41539 of 2005, which was dismissed on 21.07.2008. Against which, the respondent preferred a Writ Appeal in W.A.No.724 of 2009, and the same was allowed on 17.08.2011 by setting aside the major penalty and directing the Labour Court to reconsider the penalty punishment under Section 11A of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (in short “I.D. Act”).
iv) Pursuant thereto, the Labour Court, by award dated 22.11.2011, awarded compensation of Rs.6,00,000/- (Rupees Six Lakhs only) in lieu of reinstatement and the same was challenged by the Management as well as the petitioner, through writ petitions in W.P.No.7927 of 2012 and 20422 of 2012 respectively. This Court by common order dated 19.09.2017, modified the award imposed the punishment of compulsory retirement, as with effect from the date of order passed by the Labour Court, and directing the Management to extend all benefits, except backwages through the order dated 22.11.2011 and to pass a consequential orders within three months.
v) In compliance, the Management also issued consequential orders under Rule 40 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972, (in short “CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972”), through its order dated 23.03.2018, granting compulsory retirement with effect from 22.11.2011. However, the full retirement benefits and admissible interest were not disbursed to the respondent as per the entitlement of the period as required under Rule 23 of the CCS (Pension) Rules.
vi) According to the respondent, the full retirement benefits and interest have not been paid. The petitioner was in non-employment and he was not gainfully employed from 24.03.2003 to till date, and hence, he was entitled to get full backwages, suspension allowance, and all other attendant benefits from the date of retirement service to till the date, including the seniority promotion on par with his co-workers, and the period of suspension shall be treated as duty as natural corollary under Fundamental Rules 54-B (in short “FR”) and Rule 24 of the CCS (Pension) Rules. The Management, however, issued a cheque for a sum of Rs.9,75,680/- and deducted a sum of Rs.8,84,561/- towards penal interest and penal rent, which were allegedly recovered illegally.
vii) Aggrieved thereby, the respondent filed a claim petition in C.P.No.145 of 2019 before the I-Additional Labour Court, Chennai, (herein after referred to as “Labour Court”) and th
