Kerala High Court
Haneefa vs The Palakkad Municipality on 12 February, 2019
Author: P.V.Asha
Bench: P.V.Asha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA
TUESDAY ,THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 23RD MAGHA, 1940
WP(C).No. 41717 of 2018
PETITIONER/S:
HANEEFA, AGED 61 YEARS
S/O. KADERSHAH,
RETIRED SANITATION WORKER, PALAKKAD MUNICIPALITY,
RESIDING AT MUNICIPAL QUARTERS 27/435, MANNARGHAT
PARAMBA, KADAMKODE,
PALAKKAD 678 013
BY ADV. SRI.U.BALAGANGADHARAN
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE PALAKKAD MUNICIPALITY
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PALAKKAD 678 001
2 THE SECRETARY,
PALAKKAD MUNICIPALITY, PALAKKAD 678 001
3 THE DIRECTOR OF URBAN AFFAIRS
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001
4 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
STATE AUDIT DEPARTMENT, NEAR PALAKKAD MUNICIPALITY ,
PALAKKAD 678 001
5 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY,
LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001
BY ADV. SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON
OTHER PRESENT:
SR.GP.SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
12.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 41717 of 2018
2
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner retired as a Sanitation Worker from the Palakkad Municipality on 31.03.2018. So far his retirement benefits including DCRG, Commuted Value of Pension, Arrears of pay on account of pay revision, Arrears of DA, Time bound higher grades, Leave surrender arrears etc, are not disbursed.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that even though sufficient funds are with the respondents, they are not taking any steps to make the payment in time. Petitioner has sought a direction to proceed against the Municipality under Section 61 of the Kerala Municipality Act, in view of the fact that Municipality is not making the payment in accordance with rules. As usual the Municipality is raising the contention that they are faced with financial stringency.
3. But the pension and pensionary benefits are the entitlement of retired employees. The contingent WP(C).No. 41717 of 2018 3 employees of the Municipalities are governed by the Municipal Contingent Employees (Death Cum Retirement Benefit) Rules 1977, which mandate the Municipality to maintain a pension fund. Respondents are duty bound to effect payment of the pensionary benefits utilizing the pension fund for which they should have maintained the fund as provided in the rules and that fund should not have been diverted. It is settled law that the pension and pensionary benefits are not bounties to be disbursed at the sweet will and pleasure of the employer, but valuable property in the hands of the pensioner.
4. Just like any person, who retired from service, petitioner also has retired with the expectation that he will get a lump sum amount towards terminal benefits, which could be utilized in accordance with his plans and dreams. The Municipality has out of their sheer negligence in observing the rules, caused the delay. It cannot be heard to seek further time to disburse the pensionary benefits. WP(C).No. 41717 of 2018 4 Petitioner has toiled a lot, for the Municipal ty all these years. Making payment of paltry amounts w ll not serve any purpose for those, who retired f om service, when they are entitled to payment i lump sum.
5. Learned Government Pleader pointed out that no application for closure of PF account has been received from the Municipality in respect of the petitioner. Therefore, there shall be a direction to the Municipality to forward the application for closure of the PF account in respect of petitioner and on receipt of the same, the 3 rd respondent would take appropriate action for sanctioning the amount.
6. This court has time and again reminded the Municipality to make the payment of retirement benefits to the Sanitation Workers and others in the Contingent service of the Municipalities without causing any delay.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the second respondent to sanction and WP(C).No. 41717 of 2018 5 disburse all the terminal benefits including DCRG, Commuted Value of Pension, Arrears of pay on account of pay revision, arrears of DA and all benefits including Time bound higher grades, Leave surrender arrears etc. to the petitioner, within a period of 'three months' from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.
In case there occurs any delay in payment, respondent-Municipality shall be liable to pay interest to the petitioner at the rate of 9% per annum with effect from 01.05.2018.
Sd/-
P.V.ASHA, JUDGE.
AS WP(C).No. 41717 of 2018 6 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE SUSPENSION ORDER DATED 4.10.2012 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21.12.2013 OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT REINSTATING THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF RETIREMENT DATED 11.10.2017 ISSUED BY THE HEALTH SUPERVISOR UNDER THE FIRST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 26.11.2018 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-III PALAKKAD IN C.C. NO. 675/2018 EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14.12.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE SECOND RESPONDENT