Summary
The Supreme Court set aside a High Court judgment reopening an employee’s voluntary-retirement dispute already finally decided against him. The earlier judgments in personam and dismissal of review bound him; a later decision on withdrawal of retirement applications did not reopen that concluded case. Liberty obtained on withdrawing an application concerning enhanced ex-gratia did not authorise the fresh challenge. In the peculiar circumstances, the Bank was directed to pay Rs. 1 lakh for delayed payment, with no recovery of service benefits already paid.
Issues
- Whether a later precedent allowed the High Court to reopen the employee’s finally decided retirement dispute.
- Whether withdrawal liberty concerning enhanced ex-gratia supported the fresh petition.
- What relief was appropriate for delayed ex-gratia payment and benefits earned under interim orders.
Held
- The Supreme Court’s earlier judgments had conclusively held the respondent bound by the Scheme’s irrevocability provision, and his review had failed. Those judgments in personam could not be reopened by the High Court through reliance on the subsequent Food Corporation of India decision. (¶¶ 3, 4, 7, 9, 10)
- The withdrawn interlocutory application sought enhanced ex-gratia. Liberty to pursue an available lawful alternative remedy on that claim did not permit resurrection of the concluded retirement challenge. (¶¶ 8, 11)
- To end further litigation over delayed ex-gratia payment, the Bank was directed, in these peculiar circumstances, to pay Rs. 1 lakh as full and final compensation for all belated-payment claims. Benefits already paid for service rendered under interim orders were not to be recovered. (¶¶ 12, 13)
Result
Bank’s appeal allowed and High Court judgment set aside. Bank to pay Rs. 1 lakh in full and final settlement of delayed-payment claims; no recovery of service benefits already paid.