SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
Public Works Department - Appellant
Versus
Budho Devi - Respondent
W.P.(C) 15516 of 2022
Decided On : 11-11-2022




The court reinforces adherence to statutory timelines for appeals under the Payment of Gratuity Act, ensuring that grievances regarding gratuity entitlements are resolved lawfully.

Headnote:(A) Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 - Challenge to the order of the Controlling Authority directing payment of gratuity - Authority ruled for payment of Rs.1,12,936/- with interest @10% on behalf of the respondent for time worked - Court emphasized that appeal may be filed within the statutory period and delay in appeal is condoned. (Paras 1-7)

(B) Stay of recovery proceedings pending appeal - The court allowed stay on recovery proceedings until the appeal is filed and considered by the Appellate Authority. (Par. 7)

Facts of the case:
The writ petition was filed to challenge an order directing the payment of gratuity to the respondent workman, asserting that he should not be entitled for the period he was on a muster roll.

Findings of Court:
The learned Judge granted the petitioner-department liberty to appeal and condoned the delay in filing, emphasizing the need to resolve grievances according to the law.

Issues: The primary issue was whether the respondent was entitled to gratuity for the period on the muster roll, and the challenge to the authority's order on limitations for appeal.

Ratio Decidendi: The court upheld that any appeal should respect the prescribed period of limitation under the Payment of Gratuity Act, highlighting the necessity for the Appellate Authority to properly adjudicate such claims.

Result: Petition disposed of, allowing appeal with conditions.

Table of Content
1. payment of gratuity challenge (Para 1)
2. contentions regarding authority error (Para 2)
3. notice and representation acceptance (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
4. appeal filing and recovery stay (Para 6 , 7)
5. disposition of petition and litigation expenses (Para 8 , 9)

JUDGMENT

Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)

CM APPL. 48261/2022, CM APPL. 48262/2022 CM APPL. 48263/2022 CM APPL. 48264/2022 (exemptions)

Exemptions allowed subject to all just exceptions.

W.P.(C) 15516/2022 & CM APPL.48260/2022 (stay)

1. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 06th December, 2021 passed by the learned Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 vide which the claim application of respondent No.1 has been allowed and petitioner has been directed to pay Rs.1,12,936/- with simple interest @ 10% per annum in favour of respondent No.1.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Controlling Authority has fallen into an error by making the order for payment of gratuity even for the period when the respondent workman was only on a muster roll. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the matter could not be challenged before the Appellate Authority within the period of limitation. It has been further submitted that the Appellate Authority is not empowered to condone the delay beyond the total period of 120 days from the date of receipt of the order.

3. Issue notice.

4. Mr. Manoj Joshi, Advocate, who appears through video conferencing, accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1.

5. Learned counsel for the parties submit that in identical facts, matters have been relegated back to the Appellate Authority to decide the same in accordance with the law.

6. In view of the submissions made, the petitioner-department is granted liberty to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority in accordance with law within the period of four weeks. The delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

7. The Appellate Authority shall entertain the appeal if filed on or before 11th December, 2022 and shall decide the same in accordance with the law. Till 11th December, 2022, the recovery proceeding shall remain stayed. In case, the petitioner fails to file the appeal on or before 11th December, 2022 before the Appellate Authority in accordance with law, the respondent shall be at liberty to initiate recovery proceeding against the petitioner- department.

8. Learned counsel for the respondent No.1 has pressed for litigation expenses. Following the precedents, the petitioner-department shall pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- as litigation expenses to the respondent No.1 within four weeks.

9. With these observations, the present petition along with pending application stands disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top