Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SHAIL JAIN
CSAT System (P) Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Appellant Authority Under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SHAIL JAIN, J.
1. The present Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, inter-alia, seeking quashing and setting aside of the Order dated 10.12.2014 (hereinafter ‘Impugned order I’) passed by the Controlling Authority (hereinafter ‘CA’) appointed by the Government of NCT of Delhi, New Delhi, and the Order dated 21.10.2015 passed by the learned Appellate Authority (hereinafter ‘Impugned order II’) under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (hereinafter ‘the Act’) holding that the Respondent No. 3/Claimant is entitled and management is liable to pay Rs.1,55,769/- (One lakh fifty-five thousand seven hundred and sixty-nine only) being the amount of gratuity along with interest at 10% P.A. from the date of resignation i.e. 01.03.2013 till the date of actual payment of the said amount.
BRIEF FACTS:
2. The Petitioner company is a body corporate, incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at B-61/3, Jagat Puri, Delhi-110051 and its Head Office at C-116, SECTOR 10, NOIDA, Uttar Pradesh. The Petitioner is, inter-alia, engaged in the manufacture of Automatic Data Processing machines and units, as well a
The appropriate authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 for establishments with branches in multiple states is the Central Government, rendering state authority's jurisdiction invalid.
The Payment of Gratuity Act allows claims for both statutory and contractual gratuity to be adjudicated under the same authority, ensuring employee rights are protected.
The authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act must be determined by statutory provisions, not consent, particularly when dealing with establishments operating in multiple States.
The availability of an alternate and efficacious remedy under the statutory provisions and the non-mandatory nature of the requirement of filing a written application for gratuity under Rule 7 of the....
The Court emphasized the importance of issuing a proper show cause notice before forfeiting gratuity and upheld the principle of 'forum convenience' in determining territorial jurisdiction.
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
