The Supreme Court has brought an end to a prolonged service dispute by facilitating an amicable settlement between a former Administrative-cum-Finance Officer of the Maulana Abul Kalam Azad Institute of Asian Studies (MAKAIAS) and the Institute, directing payment of a total settlement amount of ₹20.14 lakh after converting the penalty of compulsory retirement into a golden handshake.
A Bench of Justice P S Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe disposed of the appeals after recording the consensus arrived at between the parties during the pendency of the proceedings. The Court noted that, at its suggestion, the Institute explored the possibility of an amicable resolution, resulting in an Office Memorandum dated 22 May 2026 offering to convert the appellant’s compulsory retirement into a golden handshake.
The appellant had served MAKAIAS from 2 April 2009 until 6 November 2015. Following allegations of sexual harassment made by a colleague, he was placed under suspension and later charges of insubordination and lack of integrity were levelled against him. He was eventually compulsorily retired by the Director of the Institute. While a Single Judge of the Calcutta High Court had set aside the action, the Division Bench restored the penalty, leading to the present appeals before the Supreme Court.
Under the settlement, MAKAIAS agreed to regularise the appellant’s suspension period, grant due increments under the 7th Pay Commission, and pay ₹10,14,141 after adjusting amounts already received towards gratuity and leave encashment. The Office Memorandum also recorded that necessary corrections would be made to enable release of pensionary benefits.
Considering the settlement, the Supreme Court directed the Institute to pay an additional ₹10 lakh, taking the total settlement amount to ₹20,14,141, which the appellant agreed to accept in full and final settlement of all claims. The Court directed that the amount be paid within eight weeks and further permitted the appellant to withdraw the provident fund accrued in his favour within four weeks. It also recorded the appellant’s undertaking to cooperate with the Institute for completing formalities relating to pension benefits.
