1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by the consent of the parties.

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the judgment of the Appellate Authority dated 21/03/2016 delivered in Appeal (PGA) No.263/2016.

3. Mr. Shelke, learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the issues which deserve consideration are as to whether the weekly holidays can be added to the days actually worked while calculating completion of 240 days in a calendar year for payment of gratuity, whether the revision in the pay scale with retrospective effect would entitle the petitioner for additional gratuity and whether interest component needs to be added in this case since the respondent has failed to pay the gratuity.

4. I have heard Mr. Shelke and Mr. Barde, learned Advocates for the petitioner and the respondent at length on 08/08/2016 and again today.

5. There is no dispute that a chart at page No.36 indicates the days actually worked by the petitioner. There is also no dispute that the petitioner has been working with the respondent from 1973-1974 and has superannuated on 31/05