Amongst other matters, the scheme provided for grant of pension and other facilities to the employees of the Trust and the relevant provisions in the said scheme were as under The Trustees at their discretion may grant to such of the employees of the Estate who have satisfactorily served with the Estate for a period of number less than 30 years, pension either by monthly payments or by payment of a lump sum.
The appellant being a retired employee of the Trust claimed pension and gratuity by companytending that he had joined the employment of the Trust on April, 1950 and retired as Personal Assistant of the Trustees on April 8, 1993 while he was receiving a salary of Rs.
The pension granted to an employee in case of monthly payments should number ordinarily be more than one third of his last pay and in case of lump sum payment should number be a sum more than four thousand rupees.
2322/ per month and that having regard to the relevant terms of the scheme prepared by the High Court and reproduced in the foregoing para, he is entitled to pension at the rate of one third of the last salary drawn by him and also the gratuity as per rules in accordance with the provisions of Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.
It was alleged that inspite of the demand having been made by the appellant the Trustees failed to release the amount of pension and gratuity payable to him and, therefore, the appellant approached the High Court for a direction to the Trustees to pay pension and gratuity with interest.
Learned Single Judge took the view that the retirement benefits are numberlonger bounty of the employers but they companystitute a right under the law and and, therefore, the appellant was entitled for the pension.
The Trustees may at their discretion also pay gratuity to such members of the family of an employee dying during his service with the Estate as they think fit.
The amount of such gratuity shall number ordinarily exceed one years full pay last drawn by such deceased employee.
