not entitled to the back wages = There is no case for the appellants that despite reporting for duty, the deceased employee was not permitted to join duty after 1986. On the contrary, it is seen from the records that the termination was after the publication of advertisement in the newspaper requiring the deceased employee to report for duty, failing which he was liable to be terminated. we wholly agree with the High Court that the deceased employee is not entitled to the back wages for the entire period. Having regard to the fact that the employee is no more and his widow and children are before this Court, we direct Respondent No.1 to pay a further sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac) in full and final settlement of the entire claims of the deceased employee. The said amount shall be paid to appellant No.1(i)/Nirmala Prasad Singh, wife of the deceased employee, within a period of six weeks.

                                                              NON-REPORTABLE
                        IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                     CIVIL APPEAL NOS.5103-5104 OF 2017
           [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NOS. 14479-14480 OF 2016]



      SARYUG SINGH (DEAD) THROUGH LRS.            APPELLANT(S)


                                VERSUS


      NATIONAL SEEDS CORPORATION AND ANR.         RESPONDENT(S)


                               J U D G M E N T

KURIAN, J.
      Leave granted.
2.    The appellants challenge the order passed by the  High  Court  wherein
the total compensation has been worked out in terms  of  money  and  limited
only to Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand).
3.    According to the appellants, as per the order  passed  by  the  Labour
Court and the learned Single Judge of the High Court the  deceased  employee
is entitled to back wages for a period of 23 years.
4.    Having heard the learned counsel  for  the  parties  and  having  gone
through the pleadings, it is fairly clear that it is  a  case  of  voluntary
relinquishment of service.   There  is  no  case  for  the  appellants  that
despite reporting for duty, the deceased employee was not permitted to  join
duty after 1986. On the contrary, it is  seen  from  the  records  that  the
termination was after the publication  of  advertisement  in  the  newspaper
requiring the deceased employee to report for duty,  failing  which  he  was
liable to be terminated.
5.    In that view of the matter, we wholly agree with the High  Court  that
the deceased employee is not entitled to  the  back  wages  for  the  entire
period.  Having regard to the fact that the employee  is  no  more  and  his
widow and children are before this Court, we direct Respondent No.1  to  pay
a  further  sum  of  Rs.1,00,000/-  (Rupees  One  Lac)  in  full  and  final
settlement of the entire claims of the deceased employee.  The  said  amount
shall be paid  to  appellant  No.1(i)/Nirmala  Prasad  Singh,  wife  of  the
deceased employee, within a period of six weeks.
6.    We make it clear that in case  the  amount,  as  above,  is  not  paid
within the time granted, it shall carry interest at  the  rate  of  12%  per
annum from the date of death  of  the  deceased  employee  and  the  officer
responsible for the delay shall be personally liable for it.
7.    The appeals are, accordingly, disposed of.
8.    Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
9.    There shall be no orders as to costs.

                                                   .......................J.
                                                             [KURIAN JOSEPH]


                                                   .......................J.
                                                              [R. BANUMATHI]
      NEW DELHI;
      APRIL 10, 2017.