Mr. Suman Shyam, J. (CAV) - Heard Mr. S. N. Sarma, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. A. Zahid, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner. Also heard Ms. A. Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.4. None appears for the respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3.

2. By filing the instant writ petition, a challenge has been made to the order dated 14.09.2009 (Annexure-7 to the writ petition) passed by the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central), Government of India, Dibrugarh, inter alia, directing the writ petitioner to pay simple interest at the rate of 10% per annum to the respondent No.4 on the gratuity amount for the period from 07.12.2003 to 27.09.2008 i.e. the period during which the gratuity had been withheld by the petitioner.

3. The facts of the case giving rise to the present writ petition, briefly stated, are as follows :-

I. The petitioner is the owner of the Tengapani Tea Estate situated in the district of Tinsukia, Assam and is, inter alia, engaged in the business of plantation and manufacturing of tea. For the purpose of running the said Tea Estate, a large number of workers and employees had been engaged by the petitioner and the conditions of service of such employees are governed by the provisions of the Plantation Labour Act, 1951 and the Assam Plantation Labour Rules, 1956.

II. The respondent No.4 was an employee in the petitioner's Tea Estate who was due for retirement from service with effect from 06.10.2003. However, despite attaining the age of superannuation, respondent No.4 had insisted that he be allowed to continue in service for further period. According to the petitioner, the respondent No.4 was not entitled to any extension of service and therefore, by issuing several communications he was asked to collect his retirement dues including the provident fund dues and gratuity amount. However, instead of responding to the said letters issued by the management of the Tea Estate, the respondent No.4 had approached the Labour Court at Dibrugarh by filing an application under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 raising a industrial dispute.

III. In the aforesaid application filed by the respondent No 4, which was registered and numbered as Misc. Case No.1/2007, it was, inter- alia, prayed that a direction be issued upon the management of the Tea Estate to release the provident fund and gratuity amount and also for a direction upon the management to withdraw the criminal case pending before the Court of SDJM, Tinsukia.

IV. During the pendency of the said application, an of court settlement in respect of the dispute involved in Misc. Case No.1/2007 was arrived at by and between the parties which had led to both the parties filing a memorandum of settlement before the Labour Court. In terms of the agreement recorded in the memorandum of settlement, an award was passed by the Labour Court on 16.09.2008 concluding the proceedings initiated by the respondent No.4 before the Labour Court.

V. In terms of the award dated 16.09.2008, the petitioner had paid an amount of Rs.92,462/- as gratuity settlement and a further amount of Rs.3,42,753/- as provident fund settlement by issuing Cheque bearing No.004288 dated 27.05.2008 and Cheque No.448448 dated 31.07.2008, respectively. Besides the above amount, a sum of Rs.2250/- was also paid to the respondent No.4 as bonus -cum-ex gratia for the year 2003-04.

VI. After receiving the said amount from the management, the respondent No.4 had approached the Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 by filing an application dated 28.12.2008 with a prayer for payment of interest on the gratuity amount of Rs.92,462/- for delay in payment of gratuity for the period of about five years, i.e. from 06.10.2003 to the date of application which was calculated as Rs.64,157.34 (approx.).

VII. After hearing the parties, the Controlling Authority had passed the impugned orde