VIJAYAWADA: The Andhra Pradesh High Court has come down heavily on the State government, Krishna District Cooperative Central Bank (KDCCB), and Primary Agricultural Cooperative Societies (PACS) for failing to pay terminal benefits, including gratuity and leave encashment, to four employees even 16 years after their retirement.
Justice Kuncheam Maheswara Rao on Tuesday delivered the verdict, after hearing petitions filed by the four retired employees, now aged 70, 80 and 90, who worked in KDCCB and later PACS. They have not received their retirement benefits since 2009.
“Withholding terminal benefits of retired employees for long is inhuman and unconstitutional,” the court observed.
“The petitioners worked their entire lives, and provided uninterrupted service without a blemish. Yet, even 16 years after their retirement, they have not been paid terminal benefits like gratuity and leave encashment. This amounts to violation of Article 300A (Right to Property) and Article 21 (Right to Life) of the Constitution,” it stated.
Pay benefits with 10% interest: Court
“Terminal benefits are statutory rights, not charity of the government. Financial constraints cannot be a ground to deny constitutional rights,” the court opined.
The petitioners Chittiboyina Bharatha Rao, P Chandra Mouleswar Rao, Banda Siva Ramakrishna Prasad and A Saibabu were initially paid secretaries under KDCCB, and later moved to PACS. In 2009, they were again taken back into KDCCB under NABARD guidelines. After that, they retired. Since 2009, neither PACS nor KDCCB have paid their dues.
The court rejected KDCCB’s argument that PACS did not pay their share, stating both DCCB and PACS fall under the State as per Article 12. The court directed that the petitioners or their family members be paid gratuity, leave encashment and other terminal benefits with 10% annual interest within eight weeks. KDCCB can recover PACS’ share later. Additionally, the State government, KDCCB and PACS should pay Rs 10K each to petitioners towards court expenses. “Interest on delayed gratuity is a statutory entitlement, not an employer’s discretion,” HC ruled.
