P. JYOTHIMANI, J.

1. The appeal is directed against the order of the learned Judge dated 20.11.2007, passed in W.P.No.17591 of 2005, by which the learned Judge has dismissed the writ petition.

2. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are that the third respondent joined in the appellant bank on 30.12.1957 and he retired as an Officer on 35. 1994. According to the appellant bank, he was paid gratuity of Rs.1 lakh as per section 4(3) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (in short, "the Act"), which was the maximum payable at the time of retirement of the third respondent, since the amount payable as gratuity as per the bank Scheme was less beneficial.

2(a). It appears that there was a Settlement between the Indian Banks Association representing the management and the Apex Level Officers Association on 26. 1995. As per the Settlement, the revision of salary to the employees was given with retrospective effect from 7. 1993. It is admitted that the appellant has paid the arrears of salary as per the salary revision to the third respondent from 7. 1993 till 35. 1994. As per the Settlement, in respect of payment of gratuity, the benefit of revised salary would be taken only in respect of employees who retired on or after 11. 1994.

2(b). The third respondent filed an application before the controlling authority under section 7 of the Act, claiming an amount of Rs.85,400/-, being the difference in gratuity based on the revision of salary with interest as per the Settlement stated above.

3. It was the case of the appellant bank that only for the payment of revision of salary, the date 7. 1993 was made as cut-off date as per the Settlement and for gratuity, the cut-off date was fixed as 11. 1994 and inasmuch as the third respondent retired much before the said date viz., on 35. 1994, he is not entitled for the revision of gratuity based on the revised salary. It was the contention of the appellant that the said different cut-off date for gratuity was challenged and it was ultimately decided on 30.8.2002 in W.P.No.7365 of 1999 to the effect that the cut off date for gratuity, namely 11. 1994, is valid.

4. It is seen that the second respondent, the controlling authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, by order dated 23. 2003, directed the difference in gratuity, viz., Rs.85,400/- to be paid to the third respondent. It was against the said order, the appellant has filed a statutory appeal as provided under section 7(7) of the Act before the first respondent, who by order dated 24. 2005, rejected the appeal stating that the Settlement cannot stand contrary to the provisions of the Act. It was, challenging the said order of the first respondent confirming the order of the second respondent, the appellant filed the above writ petition.

5. The main contention of the appellant before this Court as well as before the authorities under the Act was that the third respondent who joined in the appellant bank in the year 1957 retired on 35. 1994 and as per the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, he was paid the gratuity of Rs.1 lakh, which was the maximum amount permissible at the time of retirement of the third respondent and which was beneficial to him. The Settlement arrived at after the retirement of the third respondent viz., on 26. 1995 was in respect of revision of salary with retrospective effect from 7. 1993 and the difference in salary from 7. 1993 till the date of retirement of the third respondent viz., 35. 1994 was paid to him.

5(a). It was also the contention of the appellant bank that in the agreement of revision of salary, a cut-off date for payment of gratuity has been fixed and accordingly, only the officers/persons who retired from 11. 1994 should be paid gratuity as per the Settlement and therefore, the third respondent was paid the gratuity as per the Payment of Gratuity Act which was more beneficial to him than the one under the bank Scheme.

6. The contention raised on behalf of the third respondent was that ad