District Sikar v. Rajasthan Small Industries Corporation Ltd. Through

Judgment

5. Rajasthan Small Industries Corporation Ltd. Through M.d., Udyog Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C Scheme, Jaipur. Assistant Manager Pf, Rajasthan Small Industries Corporation Ltd, Udyog Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C Scheme, Jaipur. Manager Gratuity Rajasthan Small Industries Corporation Ltd., Udyog Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C Scheme, Jaipur Chief Account Officer, Rajasthan Small Industries Corporation Ltd, Udyog Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C Scheme, Jaipur Employees Provident Fund Organisation, Nidhi Bhawan, Vidyut Marg, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur. Through Asst. P.f. Commissioner. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s)

: Mr. Ravi Chirania Mr. S.K. Panwar For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.P. Garg Mr. Tej Prakash Sharma with Ms. Ishika Kothari JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 02/04/2025

1. The instant writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:- “It is therefore most humbly prayed that your lordships be pleased to accept/allow this writ petition and further be please to issue appropriate writ, order or direction to the non-petitioners thereby directing to release the gratuity amount sanctioned vide order dated 21.12.2000 along with interest till actual payment and PPO may also be corrected allowing pension w.e.f. the [2025:RJ-JP:14840] (2 of 4) [CW-6691/2018] date of retrenchment i.e. 05.07.2000 and benefits of time to time pay revisions may also be directed. Any other relief which this Hon’ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of the petitioner.”

2. By way of filing this writ petition, a direction has been sought against the respondents to release the amount of gratuity and pension with effect from the date of retrenchment i.e. 05.07.2000.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner entered in service with the respondent-Corporation in the year 1977 and he was retrenched on 05.07.2000, after rendering 23 years of service with the respondent-corporation. Learned counsel submits that the order of retrenchment was assailed by the petitioner before the Labour Court but he remained unsuccessful, hence he approached this Court challenging the order of retrenchment. However, the said writ petition was dismissed on

17.01.2017 and immediately thereafter the instant writ petition was preferred with the aforesaid prayer.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that inspite of passing the order of sanction for payment of gratuity in the year 2000 till date the gratuity and amount of pension has not been granted to the petitioner with effect from 05.07.2000 i.e. the date of retrenchment, hence appropriate orders be passed.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 opposed the prayer and submitted that the instant writ petition suffers from delay and laches. The matter pertains to the year 2000 and the petitioner slept over the matter for a considerable time and he woke up after 18 years and in the meantime, the record pertaining [2025:RJ-JP:14840] (3 of 4) [CW-6691/2018] to service of the petitioner was weeded out, hence under these circumstances, the petitioner is not entitled to get any relief and the writ petition is liable to be rejected.

6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.5 opposed the prayer and submitted that there is no illegality in passing the Pension Payment Order dated 17.06.2011 wherein the calculation of the monthly pension has been made with effect from

10.10.2008 hence under these circumstances, interference of this Court is not warranted.

7. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on the record.

8. Perusal of the record indicates that the petitioner entered into service of the respondent-corporation in the year 1977 and his services were retrenched by them vide order dated

05.07.2000. The petitioner assailed the aforesaid action of the respondents by way of raising an industrial dispute before the Labour Court but he remained unsuccessful. He approached this Court by way of filing writ petition, however the same was rejected on 17.01.2017 and immediately thereafter he submitted the instant writ petition with the aforesaid prayer.

9. This Court finds no substance in the arguments raised by counsel for the respondents that there is delay in filing the instant writ petition due to the recurrence of the cause of action. The petitioner was pursuing his main case against retrenchment before the Labour Court and then before this Court, and when the proceedings of those matters were closed, the instant writ petition was preferred. [2025:RJ-JP:14840] (4 of 4) [CW-6691/2018]

10. It is a settled proposition of law that amount of gratuity and pension is the rightful claim of an employee and the same cannot be treated as bounty by the respondents and cannot be denied on a technical count of non-availability of the record.

11. Once this fact is established on the record that the petitioner has rendered 23 years of service then certainly, he is entitled to get benefits of the said period in the form of gratuity, pension etc.

12. In view of above, the instant writ petition stands disposed of by issuing directions to the respondents to release the gratuity amount of the petitioner with interest @9% per annum within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

13. There is no reason available with the respondent No.1 to calculate the pension amount of the petitioner with effect from the year 2008 when the services of the petitioner were retrenched in the year 2000. Hence, the respondent No.5 is directed to revise the PPO and release the pension and its arrears to the petitioner with effect from 05.07.2000. Needless to observe that this exercise would be done within the above stipulated time.

14. The petitioner is directed to submit an undertaking before the respondents that he has not received any amount of gratuity in the intervening period and in case, undertaking is found to be false, the respondent No.1 would be free to take appropriate action against him.

15. All applications (pending, if any) also stand disposed of. Karan/159 (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J