Press "Enter" to skip to content

Madras HC directs LIC to revise pay scale of retired staff, pay benefits

The Madras High Court has directed the Life Insurance Corporation Limited to revise the pay scale of a retired employee, who was sacked for five years pending verification of his community certificate, and pay all allowances from the date of his reinstatement.

It also directed disbursal of all terminal benefits with “reasonable interest from the date of dues”.Justice R Subbiah gave the direction on a petition by AK Jayakumar seeking an order to LIC, Chennai, to revise his pay scale and disburse all terminal benefits withheld by the Corporation citing verification of his community certificate, which was submitted at the time of his appointment. When the matter came up, the judge said: “The LIC is directed to revise the scale of pay of the petitioner by extending all the allowances and increments from the date of his reinstatement and disburse all terminal benefits with reasonable interest from the date of dues.

“However, LIC is at liberty to move before the Scrutiny Committee for early completion of the proceedings pending before it with regard to the community status of the petitioner.” The petitioner said he had joined service in 1980 as an assistant and that he had produced a “valid” community certificate at the time of appointment. But, on the basis of a few complaints, his community certificate was sent for verification to the District Level Vigilance Committee in Chennai, he said.

The committee cancelled his community certificate and terminated his service in 2000. Subsequently, he filed separate petitions challenging the move in the High Court, which dismissed both the pleas, following which he filed two writ appeals. The court had decided in his favour and issued an order to reinstate him, he said. He was reinstated in 2005 and retired in July this year.

However, his terminal benefits were withheld by LIC citing verification of his community certificate pending with a Scrutiny Committee, he added. Rejecting the arguments of LIC’s counsel, the judge said: “I am of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to the relief as prayed for in the present writ petition.”