- (1.) 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.
(2.) 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 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.
(3.) 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 justify that because of disciplinary action initiated against the petitioner it was withheld.;