Back
High Court Of Calcutta
D. P. Kundu
MADAN MOHAN LAIK - Appellant
Versus
COAL INDIA LTD - Respondent
C. O. C. R. (W) Of 1994
Decided On : 09/10/1996
PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, 1972 - SECTION 4(6) - PAYMENT OF GRATUITY - FORFEITURE - HELD, NO PROVISION OF THE ACT CONFERS RIGHT UPON THE EMPLOYER TO WITHHOLD THE GRATUITY OF AN EMPLOYEE.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, an employee of New Kenda Colliery, retired from service on May 25, 1993. He submitted an application for payment of gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, but the respondents refused to release the gratuity cheque, claiming that the petitioner had not handed over the vacant possession of the quarter allotted to him during his service life to the management after superannuation. The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to release the gratuity cheque.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the petitioner was entitled to the gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, and that the respondents had no right to withhold the gratuity. The court also held that the petitioner's inaction in not moving the authorities under the Act for realization of his gratuity did not disentitle him to get appropriate relief from the court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction.
Issues: Whether the respondents were entitled to withhold the petitioner's gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, enacts a complete Code containing detailed provisions covering all the essential features of a scheme for payment of gratuity. It creates the right to payment of gratuity, indicates when the right will accrue, and lays down the principles for quantification of the gratuity. It provides further for recovery of the amount, and contains a special provision that compound interest at nine percent, per annum will be payable on delayed payment.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents to pay the petitioner the entire amount of gratuity he was entitled to under the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, within six weeks from the date of the judgment.
( 1 ) IN this writ application the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to release the cheque for the gratuity amount of the petitioner along with the payment of encashment of earned leave which is due to the petitioner.
( 2 ) THE petitioner stated that he was an employee of New Kenda Colliery and had been working as Typist under the Eastern Coal Fields Ltd. , a subsidiary of Coal India Ltd. The petitioner was appointed on May 11, 1953 in the said colliery. The petitioner stated that in the said colliery he had worked as P. A. , U/man No. 62310 though he was designated as Typist. The petitioner was served with a notice of superannuation dated February 12, 1990 by which he was asked to retire from service on and from July 1, 1990. The petitioner stated that being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said superannuation notice, he moved an application under Article 226 of the Constitution before this Hon'ble High Court and the said writ application was disposed of on April 24, 1990 by M. R. Mullick, J. , after hearing the parties, directing the respondents to refer the matter to the apex Medical Board for determination of the actual age of the petitioner and accordingly the respondent company referred the matter to the apex Medical Board and the Board determined the petitioner's age as 57 years as on May 25, 1990. Therefore, the writ petitioner retired from the service of the company on May 25, 1993.
( 3 ) THE writ petitioner states that he was advised to submit the application for payment of gratuity in Form I as prescribed in the Payment of Gratuity Rules under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and the petitioner, after retirement, submitted the said application on June 18, 1993 in Form I for payment of gratuity. The petitioner stated that, he also submitted a Clearance Certificate on December 27, 1993 for releasing Gratuity Bill.
( 4 ) THE petitioner also stated that he made a representation before the concerned authority for encashment of earned leave of 17 days in the year ending in 1992 and proportionate earned leave for the period January 1, 1993 to May 26, 1993 but no such payment has been made to the petitioner.
( 5 ) IT appears from the Annexure 'x' of the affidavit-in-opposition filed on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 to 6 affirmed on March 16, 1995 that the cheque amounting to Rs. 75,000/- (seventy-five thousand) vide No. O/ B-19 / 400/ 65385 dated June 24, 1994 on the State Bank of India, Asansol Branch was prepared and made ready for disbursement in favour of the petitioner. In paragraph 16 of the aforesaid affidavit-in-opposition the respondent Nos. 1 to 6 have stated that the aforesaid A/c Payee Cheque was lying with the Cashier, New Kenda Colliery for disbursement but the petitioner did not collect it and he could not produce the Clearance Certificate from the department of the company dealing with the quarters and as the cheque became over dated on December 23, 1994 the same was returned to the Finance Manager, Kenda Area and has been deposited in his custody.
( 6 ) THE respondents Nos. 1 to 6 in the aforesaid affidavit-in-opposition stated in paragraph 16 that a Clearance Certificate in favour of the petitioner was submitted before the company on December 27, 1993 but it appeared from the said certificate that no clearance had been obtained from the authority dealing with the quarters of the employees inasmuch as it is a general rule to hand over the vacant possession of the quarter occupied by the employee allotted in his name during his service life to the management after superannuation. The said respondents further stated that on enquiry it appeared that one Shri Anup Kumar Banerjee in connivance with the petitioner without having any legal authority and or permission from the management has occupied the quarter likely to be vacated by the petitioner. The said respondents further stated that the management is always read
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
