HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No.9904 of 2011 Date: April 21, 2011 Between: Shaik Ismail … Petitioner And Andhra Pradesh Sate Road Transport Corporation and others … Respondents This Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No.9904 of 2011 ORDER: This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to issue a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not arranging payment of retirement benefits of earned leave encashment, difference of salary consequent on Revision of Pay Scales, 2009 and last month salary to the petitioner as arbitrary and illegal and consequently direct the respondents to arrange payment of retirement benefits of earned leave encashment, difference of salary consequent on the revision of pay scales 2009 and last month salary to the petitioner with 12% interest from 01.05.2010. 2. The petitioner was initially appointed as Conductor on 04.04.1974 in the 1st respondent Corporation and worked at various depots. The petitioner was posted to the 3rd respondent-Repalle depot on 22.10.2009. The petitioner worked as Depot Clerk from 22.10.2009 to 30.04.2010 and retired from service on 30.04.2010 on attaining the age of Superannuation. Consequent to the retirement of the petitioner on 30.04.2010, the petitioner is entitled to receive the terminal benefits such as provident fund, gratuity, earned leave encashment and settlement salary (last month salary). Further, the revision of pay sales, 2009 which were due from 01.04.2009 were implemented in February 2010 and the arrears of difference of pay consequent on fixation of pay of the petitioner in the Revision of Pay Scales is payable to the petitioner. The petitioner was paid a sum of Rs.70,727/- towards Provident Fund and Rs.4,20,095/- towards Gratuity on 04.05.2010. The petitioner was due earned leave encashment for 300 days which was to the credit of the petitioner, difference of salary from 01.04.2009 to February 2010 due to the Revision of Pay Scales and settlement salary (last month salary). In spite of repeated requests made by the petitioners, respondent No.3 has not taken any action to arrange payment of the said amounts to the petitioner and hence, the petitioner got issued a legal notice, dated 29.12.2010 to respondent Nos.2 and 3 for payment of retirement benefits amounting to Rs.3,00,000/- with interest at 12% per annum from 01.05.2010 within 15 days from the date of receipt of the notice. Thereafter respondent No.3 issued a letter, dated 27.12.2010, advising the petitioner to attend the depot and hand over the charge of the Depot Clerk (Earnings) or finalisation of account for arranging payment. On receipt of the said letter, the petitioner approached respondent No.3 and informed him that when he had taken over the charge of post of Depot Clerk (Earnings) on 22.01.2009, one M.P.Rao, Assistant Depot Clerk (Earnings) was looking after the said post and he had not handed over any charge to him. The petitioner further submitted that consequent on the retirement of the petitioner, the said M.P.Rao has again taken over the post of Depot Clerk ( Earnings) as per the orders of respondent No.3. The petitioner further informed respondent No.3 that no charge was handed over to him when he reported to duty on 22.10.2009. Further, the retirement notification was given on 01.11.2009 giving the details of the petitioner’s service and no dues were reported in respect of the petitioner by the Unit officer and ultimately, the petitioner retired on 30.04.2010 and relieved from the post of Depot Clerk (Earnings) and there were no dues payable to the petitioner as on the date of retirement. Respondent No.3 was therefore requested to arrange settlement of dues to the petitioner as no notice was given to the petitioner regarding any deficiency during the short period of six months at Repalle depot. In spite of several requests made by the petitioner, no action is taken by respondent No.3 to settle the retirement dues of the petitioner. Hence, the writ petition. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that he retired from service on 30.04.2010 and he was not paid the retirement benefits. The question as to whether the petitioner is entitled to the retirement benefits of earned leave, encashment, difference of salary, consequent on the Revision of Pay Scales, 2009 have to be decided by the respondents in accordance with the rules and regulations of the Corporation. The petitioner has already sent a legal notice, dated 29.12.2010, to respondent Nos.2 and 3. Therefore, appropriate decision has to be taken by the respondents in accordance with the rules and regulations of the Corporation for payment of the retirement benefits of earned leave encashment, difference of salary consequent on Revision of Pay Scales 2009 and last month salary to the petitioner. Hence, the respondents are directed to take appropriate decision in the matter within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and thereafter communicate the same to the petitioner. 4. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ K.C. BHANU, J April 21, 2011 LMV