P. SHANMUGAM, J.

Petitioner's in the writ petition are the appellants herein. In the writ petition, they have prayed for issue of writ of certiorarified mandamus for quashing the order of the first respondent and for a direction to the second respondent to pay the amount of gratuity payable to each of the petitioners as computed by him and deposited with him by the third respondent as per Section 7(7) of the Payment of Gratuity Act. The writ petition was dismissed and the appeal is as against that order.

Brief facts which are necessary for the disposal of the appeal are as follows :

The employees of the third respondent management, the appellants herein some of whom are legal representatives of the deceased employees, were illiterate and poorly educated persons and they were serving in the textile, spinning and weaving mill of the third respondent management. After having put in substantial period of service, on their retirement, the management, instead of calculating the gratuity as per their continuous period of service under the provisions of Section 4 of the Gratuity Act, obtained full quit receipts for a lesser amount as against which they have preferred claim petitions under the Payment of Gratuity Act before the Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Trichy. After considering the claims of the petitioners, the Assistant Commissioner found that the petitioners were in continuous period of service for more than 240 days in the absence of any record to show that their services have been interrupted under Section 2-A of the Act. The authority further found that only under the printed forms of receipts usually payments were made to the workers and because the petitioners have signed the receipts for the amount they received from the management, that will not debar them from claiming the balance of gratuity amount for which the petitioners have statutory claim as guaranteed under the Payment of Gratuity Act. He also found that the stamped receipts cannot be equated to a quit notice. He has also found that Section 14 of the Act has the over riding effect and therefore, the receipts or vouchers will not bar or stand in the way of claiming further amounts under the Act. On this factual finding that the petitioners have worked continuously and that the stamped receipts will not debar the petitioners from claiming the gratuity and following the judgment of our Court in Jeevanlal Ltd. v. Controlling Authority Under The Payment of Gratuity Act, 1986-I-LLJ-86 (Mad), the petitioners are entitled to the balance gratuity amount as claimed by them and calculated the amount payable to each of the petitioners. However, on the management's appeal before the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, the appellate authority reversed the order on the ground that non-production of records relating to the period of service will not result in adverse inference and that the full quit receipts are contracts out of statute and the petitioners waived their right to claim and that the petitioners are estopped in law from claiming benefits under the statute. The authority has also distinguished the judgment in Jeevanlal Ltd. v. Controlling Authority Under The Payment of Gratuity Act (supra), holding that the applicants themselves have admitted the eligibility years for gratuity and gave a full receipt for final and full settlement of his claim for gratuity and therefore, the ruling will not apply.As against this appellate order, the petitioners have filed the writ petition for the relief referred to earlier. Learned single Judge has found that the full quit receipts cannot be said to be inconsistent with the provisions of the Act and that the workmen having accepted the amount without any protest till they filed the claim petition, their claims could not be sustained. The learned Judge has also found that the employer did not bargain or persuade the employees to receive the lesser amounts knowing that they are entitled to higher amount and only in such a case