High Court of KeralaSingle JudgePetition disposed of; partly allowed with a dir...

P.C. Unnikrishnan v. Secretary, Kerala Khadi & Village Industries Board

Case / Petition Number:WP(C).No. 21335 of 2009 (J)

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • P. D. Rajan
Judgment Date
2014-09-02
Court Decision / Holding
Writ petition partly allowed. The respondent is directed to pay interest on the DCRG amount of Rs. 3,18,302 at 9% per annum from 30.04.2007 (date of retirement) to 03.08.2009 (disbursement), within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.
Final Disposition
Petition disposed of; partly allowed with a direction to pay interest on the withheld DCRG within two months from the judgment date, at 9% per annum from retirement to disbursement.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • P.C. Unnikrishnan

Respondents

  • Secretary, Kerala Khadi & Village Industries Board, Vanchiyoor, Thiruvananthapuram

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Sri. V.N. Ramesan Nambisan

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Sri. K.P. Harish, SC, Kerala Khadi Board; Sri. Tom K. Thomas

Case Synopsis & Summary

This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is by P.C. Unnikrishnan, a retired Amber Instructor from the Payyannur Khadi Centre, challenging the withholding of his DCRG (death gratuity/retirement gratuity) benefit. He asserts that all other service benefits were released at the time of retirement on 30.04.2007, but the DCRG amount of Rs. 3,18,302 was retained without justification. After repeated representations and the completion of statutory audits, a Non-Liability Certificate was issued on 24.07.2009 and the DCRG was eventually disbursed on 03.08.2009—nearly two years after retirement. The petitioner contends that the unwarranted delay deprived him of timely receipt of retirement benefits and seeks a Mandamus and interest on the delayed DCRG. The respondent Board maintains that delays were not culpable, arguing that pre-retirement audits determine liabilities and that any recoveries from DCRG are normal under existing rules; the representation dated 22.06.2007 was considered before finalizing DCRG. The court invokes Supreme Court jurisprudence that pension and gratuity are valuable rights and property and that culpable delay in payment attracts interest. It holds that interest is payable and directs payment of 9% interest from the retirement date until disbursement, to be paid within two months from the judgment date.

Provisions of Law Cited

Art. 226 of the Constitution of IndiaClause 16 of the Kerala Khadi & Village Industries Board (Classification and Fixation of Recruitment of Staff) Relations, 1965

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Pension and gratuity are valuable rights and property, not mere bounty of the Government.
  • Culpable delay in payment of retirement dues warrants payment of penal interest at the current market rate; prompt payment within a reasonable time is essential.

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner argued that DCRG was improperly withheld after retirement and that, despite a statutory audit and the issuance of a Non-Liability Certificate, the Board delayed disbursal. He sought a writ of mandamus directing immediate disbursement along with interest for the delay, asserting his pensionary rights under existing rules and prior Supreme Court guidance mandating prompt payment of retirement dues.

Contentions of Respondents

The Board contended there was no culpable delay. It argued that pre-retirement statutory audits assess liabilities and any recoveries from DCRG are made in normal course; the representation was considered and the DCRG withheld for legitimate reasons, with no deliberate delay.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
State of Kerala and others v. M. Padmanabhan Nair1985 SC 356PositiveCited for the proposition that pension and gratuity are valuable rights and that delays in settlement warrant penal interest; directs prompt payment of retirement dues.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against P.C. Unnikrishnan v. Secretary, Kerala Khadi & Village Industries Board and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.D.RAJAN** ## **TUESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2014/11TH BHADRA, 1936** ## **WP(C).No. 21335 of 2009 (J)** **----------------------------** ## **PETITIONER :** **------------------** **P.C.UNNIKRISHNAN, S/O.M.MADHAVA WARRIER, RETIRED AMBAR INSTRUCTOR, PAYYANNUR KHADI CENTER, AGED 58 YEARS, RADHALAYAM HOUSE, KOLACHERRY KANNUR DISTRICT.** ## **BY ADV. SRI.V.N.RAMESAN NAMBISAN** **RESPONDENT :** **SECRETARY, KERALA KHADI & VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD, VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.** **R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.P.HARISH,SC,KERALA KHADI BOARD BY ADV. SRI.TOM K.THOMAS,** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02-09-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **bp** ## **WP(C).No. 21335 of 2009 (J)** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :** - **P1: COPY OF REMINDER DT 4/5/2009 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT.** - **P2: COPY OF POSTAL RECEIPT OF SENDING EXHIBIT P1:** - **P2(a): POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD OF EXHIBIT P1.** - **P3: COPY OF ORDER DT 12%2009 AS PER PROCEEDINGS NO. KB/469/07/A11 PASSED BY THE DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION.** ## **RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS :** - **EXT.R1(A): COPY OF THE LETTER DT 13/10/2008.** - **EXT.R1(B): COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT 22/6/2007 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT.** - **EXT.R1(C): COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO. KB 7742/2007/E2 DT 11/2/2009.** - **EXT.R1(D): COPY OF THE NON-LIABILITY CERTIFICATE DT 24/7/2009.** - **EXT.R1(E): COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO. KB.469/07/A11 DT 25/7/2009 OF THE DIRECTOR ADMINISTRATION, KHADI BOARD.** - **EXT.R1(F): COPY OF THE RECEIPT DT 3/8/2009.** - **EXT.R1(E): THE DETAILS OF THE PRODUCTION UNITS AND THE OUTLETS. (IA NO.16756/2010)** - **EXT.R1(F): COPY OF THE DETAILS OF THE INDIVIDUAL AUDIT REPORT PREPARED FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2004-2005 (IA NO.16756/2010)** - **EXT.R1(G): COPY OF THE CONSOLIDATE AUDIT REPORT DT 11/5/2007.** - **EXT.R1(H): COPY OF THE AUDIT REPORT OF THE MAIN CENTER GODOWN OF 2005-06 RECEIVED ON 16/1/2007.** - **EXT.R1(I): COPY OF THE CONSOLIDATED AUDIT REPORT DT 27/7/2008 OF THE PAYYANUR KHADI CENTER FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 20056-06.** - **EXT.R1(J): COPY OF THE INDIVIDUAL AUDIT REPORT 2006-07. EXT.R1(K): COPY OF THE CONSOLIDATED AUDIT REPORT OF PAYYANNUR DT 27/7/2008. //TRUE COPY//** **P.A. TO JUDGE** **bp** ## **P.D. RAJAN, J.** ------------------------------------------- W.P (C) No.21335 of 2009 ---------------------------------------------Dated this the 2[nd] day of September, 2014 ## **JUDGMENT** This writ petition is filed under Art.226 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner seeking the following ## reliefs: “i) to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondent to disburse the withheld D.C.R.G amount of Rs.3,18,302/- with interest calculated two months after the date of retirement on the above amount forthwith. ii) to declare that without any reason or justification, the respondent has withheld release of the D.C.R.G amount to the petitioner and therefore, the petitioner is entitled for interest on the D.C.R.G amount two months after the date of his retirement till the date of disbursement of the amount.” The petitioner retired on 30.4.2007 as Amber Instructor on superannuation from the Payyannur Khadi Centre under the W.P.(C)No.21335/09 2 respondent Khadi Board. All service benefits except DCRG were released to him. Even after repeated demand from the petitioner, the respondent withheld DCRG amount without any reason. After the completion of the statutory audit, the recommendation for the issuance of the N.L.C was issued from the Payyannur Khadi Centre, on 13.10.2008, which was submitted before the respondent and N.L.C. was issued by the respondent on 24.7.2009. Finally, the respondent disbursed DCRG to the petitioner after two years from the date of retirement. Hence, the petitioner contended that he is entitled to get the interest for the delay in disbursing the DCRG. 2. In the counter affidavit, the respondent contended that there is no delay in disbursing the DCRG amount. All other benefits were disbursed except DCRG immediately after his retirement. It is submitted that before retirement of employees, the board has to conduct W.P.(C)No.21335/09 3 statutory audit with respect to the profit and loss accounts of each godown annually and also has to fix the liability, if any of the employees who handles the stock in case of shortage of stock. As per the existing service rule, if an employee of the Board commits any liability it can be recovered from his DCRG only in normal circumstances. Since the petitioner was handling huge stocks in the capacity of Manager Central Godown attached to Payyannur Khadi Centre, his liability has to be computed through annual audit as a mandatory legal requirement before disbursing DCRG to him. This is a usual practice conducted in Khadi Board. After his retirement, the petitioner filed a representation dated 22.6.2007 for clearing some anomalies in fixing his pay. Thus, the grievance pointed out by the petitioner in his representation was considered by the Board before fixing DCRG and there is no culpable delay on the part of the W.P.(C)No.21335/09 4 respondent in disbursing DCRG. Therefore, according to the respondent, the respondent is not liable to pay any interest on DCRG. 3. It is clear that the petitioner, who was working as Amber Instructor, retired on 30.4.2007. As per Clause 16 of the Kerala Khadi & Village Industries Board (Classification and Fixation of Recruitment of Staff) Relations, 1965, for the purpose of pay, leave, dismissal, removal, superannuation etc., the provisions of the K.S.R. shall be applicable to the respondent Board also. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to get the pensionary benefit including DCRG at the time of retirement. In Ext.R1(a), the respondent informed that there was no liability to the petitioner at the time of retirement on 30.4.2007. Ext.R1(d) Non Liability Certificate was issued by the respondent on 24.7.2009. Ext.R1(h) is the audit report of 2005-2006. The audit report was prepared on W.P.(C)No.21335/09 5 15.1.2007. In Ext.R1(j) it is specifically stated by the auditor that no irregularities are noticed during the period of Audit. If that be the position, I am of the view that there was inordinate delay in processing the DCRG benefit and allotting it to the petitioner. Therefore, the contention put forward by the petitioner has some relevancy. Apex Court in State of **Kerala and others** v. ## **M. Padmanabhan Nair** [1985 SC 356] held as follows: “ Pension and gratuity are no longer any bounty to be distributed by the Government to its employees on their retirement but have become, under the decisions of this Court, valuable rights and property in their hands and any culpable delay in settlement and disbursement thereof must be visited with the penalty of payment of interest at the current market rate till actual payment. 2. ....................The necessity for prompt payment of the retirement dues to a Government servant immediately after his retirement cannot be over emphasised and it would not be unreasonable to direct that the liability to pay penal interest on these dues at the current market rate should commence at the expiry of two months from the date of retirement.” W.P.(C)No.21335/09 6 Necessity of prompt payment to the retirement benefit to the petitioner was reiterated by the Apex Court and this Court in several decisions. Therefore, unreasonable delay in processing the DCRG benefit of the petitioner has to be faced with liability to pay penal interest at the current market rate. The petitioner retired on 30.4.2007 and the DCRG benefit disbursed on 3.8.2009. The total sum given to the petitioner towards DCRG was Rs.3,18,302/-. In the circumstances, the respondent is liable to pay interest at the rate of 9% from 30.4.2007 till disbursement of DCRG on 3.8.2009. The respondent is directed to pay the interest amount within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. **P.D. RAJAN, JUDGE.** acd W.P.(C)No.21335/09 7 W.P.(C)No.21335/09 8