SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Mad) 2364

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
J. SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD, J.
G. Ravishankar – Appellant
Versus
Union of India Rep.by The Secretary to Government (Art & Culture) Chief Secretariat, Puducherry & Others – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 19733 of 2020
Decided On : 27-07-2023

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner:P. Suresh, Advocate. For the Respondent:G. Djearany Government Advocate (Pondicherry).

The central legal point established in the judgment is the duty of the employer to settle retirement benefits, including gratuity, in a timely manner as per the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.

Headnote:

Gratuity - Retirement Benefits - Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, Section 4(1), Section 7(3-A)

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a retired research fellow, sought a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to settle his gratuity in accordance with the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. The respondents admitted the petitioner's entitlement but cited financial constraints for non-payment.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the respondents' failure to settle the gratuity amount after the petitioner's retirement was illegal and unjust. It held that the petitioner was entitled to the gratuity amount and interest as per Section 7(3-A) of the Act.

Issues: Non-payment of gratuity to the petitioner after retirement, financial constraints cited by the respondents, and the entitlement of the petitioner to gratuity and interest under the Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the respondents' inaction in settling the gratuity amount after the petitioner's retirement was illegal and contrary to the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. It emphasized the duty of the employer to settle retirement benefits in a timely manner.

Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, directing the respondents to pay the gratuity amount and applicable interest to the petitioner immediately.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to settle the Gratuity payable to the petitioner in accordance with the Section 4(1) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and also to pay the interest in terms of Section 7 (3-A) of the Act to the amount of gratuity from the date of his superannuation (ie., 30.06.2016) till the actual date of payment and in accordance with the representation initially filed on 07.12.2016 and lastly filed on 12.03.2020 within the time limit.)

1.This writ petition has been filed seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to settle the Gratuity payable to the petitioner in accordance with the Section 4(1) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and also to pay the interest in terms of Section 7 (3-A) of the Act to the amount of gratuity from the date of his superannuation (ie., 30.06.2016) till the actual date of payment and in accordance with the representation initially filed on 07.12.2016 and lastly filed on 12.03.2020 within the time limit or pass further orders as deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and render justice.

2. On behalf of the respondents a counter affidavit has been filed. The petitioner filed his rejoinder.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner passed M.A.(Tamil), M.Phil and Ph.D. in Tamil. He entered into the service as “Research Fellow” in Pondicherry Institute of Linguistics and Culture, Puducherry on 18.08.2003 in the scale of pay of Rs.8000-275-13500 plus D.A., HRA, CCA and T.A as admissible to the employees of Pondicherry Institute of Linguistics and Culture, Puducherry. The scale of pay was fixed by the Institute in accordance with the orders of the Government of Puducherry College. The petitioner retired on 30.06.2016, on attaining the age of superannuation, after rendering 13 years of unblemished service. The employer (i.e) the second respondent had not sanctioned payment of gratuity as per rules in force (i.e,) Clause (i) of the sub rule (1) of rule 8 of the payment of Gratuity (Central) rules, 1972.

4. The learned counsel submits that the gratuity is a type of retirement benefit and it will be made with the intent of monetarily helping the employee after his retirement. The general principle underlying a gratuity scheme is that by service over a long period, the employee is entitled to claim a certain amount as retirement benefit.

5. The learned counsel further submits that gratuity has to be paid to an employee for his meritorious and honest service rendered to the employer. The Gratuity is being paid at the rate of 15 days wages for every completed years of service or part thereof in excess of six months. The 15days wages will be calculated by dividing the last drawn wages by 26 and multiplying the result with 15. Under Section 4(3) the maximum gratuity that is payable is fixed at Rs.20,00,000/- as per the Gratuity (Amendment) Act, 2018.

6. The learned counsel would further submit that the Pondicherry Institute of Linguistics and Culture, Puducherry is one of the institute started long ago in the year 1986 by the Government of Puducherry, under the Societies Act. It is a non-profit making educational society financed wholly and substantially by the Government of Puducherry by way of Grant-in-Aid. The learned counsel contends that the academic and non-academic staff of the Pondicherry Institute of Linguistics and Culture have fulfilled the conditions required to qualify for pension, as such they are very much eligible to exercise the pension scheme as per rules in force.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the retirement benefits are not settled by the respondents to the petitioner which is in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner have made representations to the Director, Pondicherry Institute of Linguistics and Culture, Puducherry on 07.12.2016, 07.03.2

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top