Petitioner to be given pensionary benefits for her loss: HC
Though the petitioner may not get the back wages, the judge opined that she was entitled to get the undue services of 20 years enjoyed by the impersonator, to her credit for the purpose of the retiral pensionary benefits.
Madras High Court
CHENNAI: The Madras High Court refused to direct the State to pay salary for the 20 years of service as back wages to the petitioner, since an impersonator snatched the job from her in a fraudulent manner. However, the court also granted retiral pensionary benefits.
“It’s a strange case where the petitioner got affected due to the impersonation committed by someone else, by stealing the job for which the petitioner was selected,” wrote Justice RN Manjula while disposing of the petition.
It’s easier to state that the petitioner did not have any luck utilising her appointment despite being selected in the interview, read the judgment. “But that will not compensate for the loss she had suffered for many years. However, it is not practically possible for the State to recover the wages from the person who had taken it by committing fraud,” wrote the judge. “In view of the peculiar situation involved in this case, I feel the relief will also be peculiar.”
Though the petitioner may not get the back wages, the judge opined that she was entitled to get the undue services of 20 years enjoyed by the impersonator, to her credit for the purpose of the retiral pensionary benefits.
Petitioner R Parvathi registered her name with the employment exchange in 1990 seeking a job and she was also called for an interview held for the post of Class IV services in Pollachi municipality. However, she did not get the job. After three years, the petitioner came to know that another person with the same name got the job in a fraudulent manner with a close nexus with the municipality.
Later, Parvathi approached TN State Administrative Tribunal, and in 2006 the case was transferred to HC. After hearing the petitioner, the HC held that the impersonator’s employment was illegal and allowed the petition. Aggrieved by the order and claiming wages, the impersonator approached the Supreme Court, which dismissed it.
After a long battle, the petitioner joined the employment in September 2010 for the job she was selected for in 1990. In 2016, the petitioner sent a letter to Pollachi municipality claiming wages for 20 years of service she lost by the impersonator, along with continuity of service.
However, the municipality refused to pass any order in favour of the petitioner. Hence, she knocked on the doors of HC.
