CW 10125/07 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10125/07 M.K. Dhir Versus Rail India Technical and Economic Services through its Managing Director DATE OF ORDER : 09/01/2009 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI Mr. Ravi Chirania, for petitioner Mr. Aslam Khan, for respondents *** This is a second round of litigation of the present petitioner claiming part of his retiral benefits which was withheld by the respondents which became due and payable to him on the date of his retirement on 31st August, 2001. Petitioner earlier approached this court by filing CW No.6091/03. While disposing of writ petition on 1st December, 2005, this court directed the respondents to pay all retiral dues within 30 days and all the formalities be complied with by the respective parties. All other admissible dues including retiral benefits were paid to the petitioner but while settling all dues, the respondents withheld a sum of Rs.15,000/- on account of non-furnishing CW 10125/07 [2] inspection certificates as alleged and part of the salary for the month of May, 1998 which according to them was paid in excess of 18 days as evident from Ann.7 dt.9th June, 2006. Apart from it, counsel submits that delay so far as gratuity amount is concerned, in no manner can be said to be attributed to him and the same shall carry interest in terms of Sec.7(3A) of Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 which has been illegally denied to him. Respondents have filed reply to the writ petition where they tried to justify that a sum of Rs.15,000/- was withheld because of non- furnishing inspection certificates as a token amount and as he was relieved on 12th May, 1998 to report to the office of Calcutta, but due to mistake salary for whole of the month of May, 1998 was paid to him, accordingly, his 18 days salary was deducted. So far as non-payment of interest on gratuity is concerned, counsel for respondents submits that there was no direction of this court while disposing of earlier writ petition pursuant to which retiral dues were paid to him. Apart from it, he further tried to CW 10125/07 [3] justify that because of disciplinary action initiated against the petitioner it was withheld. I have heard counsel for parties and with their assistance perused the material on record. So far as claim with respect to withholding of Rs.15,000/- on account of non-furnishing of inspection certificates is concerned, there appears to be no justification for the reason that if petitioner failed to furnish inspection certificate as desired that in no manner authorize the respondents to deduct from his retiral benefits unless permitted under law. No such provision has been brought to the notice of this court which authorized the respondents in deducting from retiral benefits on account of non-furnishing of inspection certificate as alleged by them in their reply. So far as deduction salary of 18 days of May, 1998 is concerned as evident from document Ann.1 salary was paid to the petitioner for whole of the month of May, 1998 and if at all the respondents were of the view that it has wrongly CW 10125/07 [4] been paid to him the same could not have been deducted without due compliance of principles of natural justice. So far as non-payment of interest over the gratuity is concerned, it is true that there was no direction of this court while disposing of earlier petition preferred by the petitioner on 1st December, 2005. Suffice it to say that statute itself takes note of payment of interest if gratuity has not been paid which is due and admissible to the employee in terms of Sec.7(3) of the Act within 30 days from the date it became payable and delay is not attributable to the employee. It is not the case of the respondents that delay is in any manner was attributable to the petitioner. In absence whereof, petitioner is certainly entitled for interest in terms of Sec.7 (3A) of the Act, 1972. Consequently, writ petition stands allowed. Respondents are directed to make payment of amount which was deducted on account of non- furnishing of inspection report [Rs.15,000/-] plus 18 days salary for the month of May, 1998 CW 10125/07 [5] i.e. Rs.9,906/-. In addition to it, respondents shall also pay interest over sum of gratuity paid to the petitioner in terms of Sec.7(3A) of the Act, 1972. Respondents shall ensure compliance within three months. No costs. [AJAY RASTOGI], J. FRBOHRA10125CW07 9-1.doc