Allowed

Smt.P.Sarala v. Apsrtc.,rep.by its Managing Director

Telangana HC29 Aug 2012WP/7693/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition concerning terminal benefits, the court held that the respondent corporation cannot insist on a legal heir certificate for gratuity payment when the petitioner is already treated as such. The court directed payment subject to the petitioner furnishing an indemnity bond to cover potential claims by an estranged first wife.

What did the court decide?

The respondent to settle gratuity and additional monetary benefit within 30 days upon receipt of an indemnity bond; the petitioner to deposit the amount in a fixed deposit for one year.

Smt.P.Sarala Vs Apsrtc.,rep.by its… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION No. 7693 of 2010

¶2

O R D E R :

¶3

This Writ Petition is heard at the interlocutory stage with the consent of the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel for APSRTC.

¶4

The petitioner herein has claimed to be the wife of one Sri Parasa Babu Rao employed as a driver with the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC) who died prematurely an unfortunately on 17.12.2007. She has claimed the terminal benefits payable consequent to the death of her husband. It will be appropriate to notice that the petitioner herein appears to have submitted a legal heir certificate dated 09.05.2008 issued by the Tahsildar, Bheemgal Mandal, Nizamabad District, based upon which certificate, the following amounts have been settled and paid to the petitioner herein on the dates noted there against by the respondent Corporation:

¶5

a) Rs.1,21,953/- towards P.F. amount paid on 08.04.2008. b) Rs.1,23,594/- towards S.B.T. amount paid on 31.05.2008. c) Rs.0,57,133/- towards E.D.L.I.F. amount paid on 26.05.2008. d) Rs.1,13,000/- odd towards C.C.S. amount.

¶6

However, they were delaying the settlement of gratuity amount and amount payable in lieu of compassionate appointment to be made, which is known as providing for additional monetary benefit.

¶7

Sri H. Venu Gopal, learned Standing Counsel for APSRTC would submit that unless the petitioner produces a legal heir certificate from a competent civil Court, it will not be feasible to settle and pay gratuity amount and the additional monetary benefit.

¶8

Per contra, Sri V. Narasimha Goud, learned counsel for the petitioner would urge that when they have settled four other terminal

¶9

benefits noted supra in favour of the petitioner, the Corporation is not justified in insisting upon production of a legal heir certificate from a competent civil Court, which is not only expensive, but a time consuming affair. This apart, Sri Narasimha Goud has drawn my attention to a photo copy of an affidavit said to have been executed by Sri Parasa Babu Rao, S/o Pochanna, on 02.07.2004 at Armoor. He has produced this affidavit-cum-declaration to vouch for the fact that the deceased employee, during his life time, urged the Depot Manager, APSRTC, Bheemgal Depot to carry out necessary corrections in the service record duly deleting the name of his first wife Smt. Susheela, as they were separated due to a customary divorce granted by the community elders. The deceased employee has categorically stated that after separation from Smt. Susheela, he married the petitioner herein and they were living together for the past 22 years and hence, he sought for the name of the petitioner herein to be treated as his nominee and necessary corrections be made in his service records.

¶10

I find considerable force in the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner has been treated as the legal heir of the deceased Babu Rao by the Corporation and various amounts have been settled as noticed supra. However, when it came to payment of gratuity and additional monetary compensation in lieu of compassionate appointment, the Corporation is insisting upon a legal heir certificate from a competent civil Court. In my opinion, this is totally uncalled for. In case the Corporation is apprehensive that its interests will be in jeopardy, should there be a parallel claim made by the estranged first wife of the deceased namely Susheela, the same can be mitigated by insisting upon the petitioner herein to produce an indemnity bond, indemnifying the Corporation against any such

¶11

possible risk, which the Corporation might be exposed later on. Therefore, subject to the writ petitioner herein furnishing an unconditional and unqualified indemnity bond proposing to indemnify the APSRTC against any loss that it might suffer in case the estranged first wife of Babu Rao, namely Susheela makes a claim for payment of any of the benefits arising out of the death of Sri Babu Rao, the respondent shall settle the amount of gratuity and the additional monetary benefit within 30 days and pay the same through a crossed account payee cheque/pay order/demand draft. Further, the petitioner is directed to keep the said amount in an interest-bearing fixed deposit, with any of the nationalized banks for a minimum period of one year, so that in case of any claim from Smt. Susheela, in the meantime, to the Corporation, the same can be easily neutralized.

¶12

With this, the Writ Petition stands allowed to the extent indicated supra. No costs.

¶13

Consequently, the miscellaneous applications, if any shall also stand disposed of.

¶14

---------------------------------------------(NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J)

¶15

29^th August 2012

¶16

ksld

Smt.P.Sarala v. Apsrtc.,rep.by its Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.P.Sarala v. Apsrtc.,rep.by its Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K. Samuel , E-100035, Conductor Vs The Managing Director, Apsrtc, Musheerabad

A. Babu, Vs The Andhra Bank, a nationalized Bank

Dr. Valli Rajagopal, Vs T.Sakala Reddy

K.P.Johnmilton Vs The Andhra Pradesh Forest Development Corporation

B. Baig, Vs Apsrtc, Musheerabad, Hyderabad

P. Venkat Rao, S/o. Saliyya Vs Andhra Bank (a Govt of India undertaking)