Setback for KSRTC as High Court upholds Lok Ayukta order on benefits to retired employees

Setback for KSRTC as High Court upholds Lok Ayukta order on benefits to retired employees K.C. GOPAKUMAR KOCHI A verdict of the Division Bench of the Kerala High Court upholding a Lok Ayukta order directing the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) to disburse the value of surrender of earned leave by retired employees prior to the date of the bipartite agreement signed on April 13, 1999 is likely to push the KSRTC further into financial distress. Two-month time frame The Bench also directed the KSRTC to implement in two months the orders of the Lok Ayukta to disburse the values of leave surrender of 300 days to retired employees. Ironically, the Bench’s verdict comes as double whammy to the corporation as it has been passed on a writ petition filed by the KSRTC against the Lok Ayukta proceedings in cases filed by retired employees, despite a single judge’s verdict quashing similar orders earlier in this regard. The single judge had held that the claims based on the bipartite settlement is applicable only from the date mentioned in the agreement and not prior to that. However, the Lok Ayukta is going ahead with the proceedings in similar cases filed by retired staff. The continuance of the proceedings by the Lok Ayukta was nothing but an abuse of the process of law, the KSRTC argued. It stated that surrender of earned leave was reintroduced via the agreement from February 1, 1999. Therefore, the employees are entitled to claim it at the time of retirement only from February 1, 1999, it said Terming the single judge’s order bad in law, the Bench observed that there was absolutely no discussion or valid reasons in the judgment to find fault with the orders of the Lok Ayukta, except to state that the terms and conditions of the agreement are sacrosanct. Benefits of surrender of earned leave are a claim arising out of retirement and the writ court (single judge) had failed to address the issue in proper perspective. However the Lok Ayukta, in its order, had elaborately discussed the effect of the clauses of the agreement and, therefore, the Lok Ayukta has every jurisdiction to redress the grievances of the retired employees The Bench also rapped the KSRTC for not bringing to the attention of the single judge the fact that the cases pertaining to the Lok Ayukta should have been listed before a Division Bench. When, as per roster, these matters had to be heard and decided by a Division Bench, “decision of the writ court is not binding” on the Division Bench. All the judgments by the single judge in similar cases “are no more a good law”, the Bench observed. https://epaper.thehindu.com/ccidist-ws/th/th_kochi/issues/33506/OPS/G2RB559VR.1+G0EB561K2.1.html