The central legal point established in the judgment is the limitation on the Government's power to stay recovery proceedings and grant installment facilities, emphasizing the authority of quasi-judicial bodies and the statutory procedures for recovery.

Abdul Gafoor, J.

An important issue has come up to he resolved - whether Government can stay the revenue recovery proceedings initialed to recover the amounts due under the orders of the authorities set up under the provisions of Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 or the Payment of Wages Act 1936 or whether they can grant instalment facilities to an employer who defaulted in payment of such amount determined by the respective quasi judicial authorities.

2. The petitioner was an employee under the 5th respondent. Gratuity due to him was not paid He moved the Authority constituted under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. The Authority, by Ext. P1, directed the fifth respondent to pay the petitioner an amount of Rs.29,665.57 within 30 days from 3.11.1992 and in default thereof within 15% interest

3. Claiming arrears of wages due from the 5th respondent, the petitioner approached Payment of Wages Authorities (Labour Court), Kollam under section 15(2) of the Payment of Wages Act 1936. The authority passed Exl.P2 order directing the 5th respondent to pay the petitioner an amount of Rs. 37,380/- within a month from 2.3.1993.

4. The 5th respondent committed default and did not pay the amount covered by Exts. P1 and P2. The petitioner moved for recovery of the amounts due under Exts. P1 and P2. "The first respondent initiated action through respondents 2 and 3. The 5th respondent approached this Court in O.P. Nos. 15403/93 and 8153/94. This court stayed the recovery proceedings. When the petitioner moved, the stay order against recovery of the amount covered by Ext. P2 was made conditional on the 5th respondent remitting Rs. 25,000/- within six. weeks from 27.9.1994. This is evident from Ext. P3. The 5th respondent did not comply with the condition. So the stay order lost its efficacy and it was made so clear by this Court as per Ext. P4 order. The stay order against recovery of the amount covered by Ext. PI was not extended. Thus in effect there are no slay orders from this court against recovery of the amounts covered by Ext. P1 and P2. In these circumstances the petitioner requested respondents 2 and 3 to continue the recovery proceedings. They are not doing any thing. The petitioner submits that this is because, the 4th respondent-State has been approached by the 5th respondent and the former has passed an order directing the latter to permit the amount in instalments, in effect the recovery stood stayed.

5. It is in the above circumstances that the petitioner has approached this- court for a direction to respondents land 3 to take immediate revenue recovery steps to realise the amounts covered by Exts P1 and P2 and for a declaration that the Government or Collector has no power to stay or grant instalment facility, when amounts covered by Exts. P1 and P2 are sought to be recovered.

6. At the time of hearing it is submitted by the Govern net Pleader that Government has granted instalment facility to the 5th respondent to discharge the liability under Exts.P1 and P2. Thus in effect recovery was stayed.

7. Exts. P1 and P2 have become final the 5th respondent cannot dispute the liability arisen out of Exts. P1 and P2. These are the orders issued by quasi judicial authorities constituted under the two labour welfare legislation mentioned above.

8. Payment of gratuity is a liability cast on the employer. When the amount so payable is determined by the authority as contained in section 7 of the Gratuity Act as per Ext. P1, the 5th respondent shall pay the amount so directed. On his default, the employee can seek recovery of the said amount as provided in section 8 of the Act.

9. Sec. 8 provides for mode of recovery. As per this, the Collector shall recover the amount with interest as "arrears of land revenue". For that the procedure provided in the Revenue Recovery Act shall be set in motion. Even then the recovery is as provided in the Payment of Gratuity Act and not under Revenue

Recovery Act.

10. Sec. 83 of the Revenue Recovery Act confer