The right to receive gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, cannot be defeated by any instrument or contract, and the Act prevails over other enactments or contracts.

JUDGMENT :

Milind N. Jadhav, J.

Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties.

2. The present Petition has been filed by the Municipal Council, Achalpur, challenging the judgment dated 06.01.2017 in Payment of Gratuity Appeal No. 5/2015, passed by the Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, Amravati and the judgment dated 26.06.2015 passed in Application PGA No.49/2012 by the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, Labour Court, Amravati. Both the above concurrent judgments have been impugned in the present Writ Petition.

3. Relevant facts required to be cited for the purpose of deciding the present controversy are as under:

(a) The Respondent was initially appointed by the Petitioner Municipal Council as a daily wager in the department of Family Planning Survey and Low Cost Sanitation Survey with effect from 02.06.1984. There is no dispute that though the Respondent was a daily wager performing services of a Clerk. The services of the Respondent came to be terminated by the Petitioner Municipal Council on 01.07.1985 whereupon Respondent filed ULP No. 1791/1993 before the Labour Court, Amravati. The Labour Court, Amravati by its order dated 28.08.1994 directed the Petitioner Municipal Council to reinstate the Respondent in service with continuity and full back wages on the ground of non-compliance of the provisions of Section 25-F of the I.D. Act, 1948. There were 91 similar daily wagers, who were working with the Petitioner Municipal Council during the then time. Thereafter, pursuant to the decision taken by the State Government, these, 91 daily wagers including the Respondent came to be absorbed by the Petitioner- Municipal Council in terms of order dated 28.09.2002 issued by the Regional Director Municipal Administration and Commissioner, Amravati Division, Amravati. Thus, the Respondent was absorbed on the post of Clerk in Class-III cadre in the pay-scale of Rs. 950/- by the Petitioner-Municipal Council with a condition, that the said post will be abolished on the retirement of such employee or if it becomes vacant for any other reason. Thereafter, by order dated 13.10.2002, the Petitioner counsel absorbed the services of Respondent on the post of Clerk. Respondent thereafter, continued to work for a further period of eight years and one month with the Petitioner-Municipal Council and on attaining the age of superannuation retired from its services on 12.10.2010.

(b) Since the Respondent was paid gratuity for the period of eight years and one month only, being aggrieved, the application being Payment of Gratuity Application No.49/2012, before the Controlling Authority, Labour Court, Amravati on 23.10.2012, under the provisions of Section 4 of the Payment Gratuity Act, 1972, inter alia, seeking direction to the Petitioner to pay Gratuity for the entire length of his service beginning from 02.06.1984.

(c) Thus, the Respondent computed and sought Payment of Gratuity of Rs.1,50,917/- as arrears of gratuity along with the interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of application until date of payment. Before the Controlling Authority, Labour Court, Amravati, the Petitioner submitted that on application of the policy decision of the Government of Maharashtra in terms of order dated 28.09.2002 passed by the Regional Director Municipal Administration, the submission of the Respondent that he had rendered more than 26 years of continuous services was in correct. According to the Petitioner the services of the Respondent were regularized by order dated 13.10.2002 on the specific condition that the Respondent would not be entitled to any financial and retirement related benefits in respect of the services rendered by him as daily wager earlier.

(d) The Controlling Authority framed the following issues and gave its findings:

"In view of the rival pleadings of the parties the