( 1 ) BOTH these matters involve the common question of law as to whether the Gujarat Labour Welfare Board is an establishment so as to invoke the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 by the employees of the Board for the purpose of the payment of the gratuity and, therefore, both the matters are decided by this common judgment and order.

( 2 ) FACTS relating to Special Civil Application No. 342 of 1995 : petitioner herein was working as a part-time worker with the Gujarat Labour welfare Board and she retired after serving for a period of nearly 31 years and 7 months on 31-1-1993. The Gujarat Labour Welfare Board refused to pay the gratuity on petitioners retirement by saying that she was not entitled to any gratuity. The petitioner, therefore, applied before the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act vide Application No. 178 of 1993 on 27-4-1993. The Controlling authority allowed the petitioners application on 20-8-1993 and directed the payment of Rs. 8,941. 95 Ps. to her against the due amount of gratuity. Against this order dated 20-8-1993 passed by the Controlling Authority, the Gujarat Labour Welfare board preferred an Appeal before the Appellate Authority at Ahmedabad under the payment of Gratuity Act. The Appellate Authority allowed the Appeal on 21-4- 1994 and set aside the order passed by the Controlling Authority. Against this order dated 21-4-1994 passed by the Appellate Authority at Ahmedabad the present Special civil Application was filed on 17-1-1995 before this Court. No return has been filed on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 and 3. But Mr. Pandya appearing on behalf of Gujarat Labour Welfare Board-respondent No. 1 has filed an affidavit-in-reply dated 6-3-1995 today and a copy thereof has been made available to Mr. Bhaya, the learned Counsel for the petitioner.

( 3 ) FACTS relating to Special Civil Application No. 10106 of 1995 : this Special Civil Aplication has been filed by the Welfare Commissioner,. Gujarat Labour Welfare Board against the order dated 11-9-1995 passed by the appellate Authority in Appeal No. 26 of 1995 whereby the Appeal of D. M. Bhattemployee of the Gujarat Labour Welfare Board was allowed. D. M. Bhatt had retired from the service of the Gujarat Labour Welfare Board on 31-10-1993 and whereas the gratuity was not paid to him, he had preferred an Application No. 56 of 1994 before the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act. The Controlling authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act at Rajkot passed an order on 24-3- 1995 rejecting the application of D. M. Bhatt-respondent No. 1. Against this order dated 24-3-1995 D. M. Bhatt preferred an Appeal before the Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act and the Appellate Authority allowed the Appeal of D. M. Bhatt against the Gujarat Labour Welfare Board and directed that the payment of Rs. 32,900. 00 be made to D. M. Bhatt against the gratuity. Against this order dated 11-9-1995 passed by the Appellate Authority under the Payment of gratuity Act at Rajkot this Special Civil Application was preferred on 29-11-1995 by the Gujarat Labour Welfare Board. No return has been filed on behalf of any of the respondents.

( 4 ) HAVING narrated the facts of both the cases as above, I find that the Appellate authorities at Ahmedabad and Rajkot have taken different and contradictory views on the question as to whether the employees of Gujarat Labour Welfare Board are entitled to gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act or not. Mr. Bhaya appearing on behalf of the employees has argued that the Gujarat Labour Welfare Board is an establishment within the meaning of the law in force in relation to establishments in the State of Gujarat under Sec. 1 (3) (b) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and the petitioner Jayaben, even if a part-time employee, is covered by the definition of employee under Sec. 2 (e) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and is entitled to the Payment of Gratuity under Sec. 4, payment the