Appellate authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act has no jurisdiction to entertain appeals filed beyond the statutory 120-day limit from the receipt of the order, and sufficient cause does not extend this limitation.

JUDGMENT :

R. SAKTHIVEL, J.

Considering the simple nature of the issue involved, these writ appeals were taken up for hearing at the admission board.

2. The third respondent in all the captioned writ appeals were employees under the appellant - sugar mill. They submitted individual applications under Rule 7 of 'the Tamil Nadu Payment of Gratuity Rules, 1973' ['Gratuity Rules' for short] vide Form I in the month of July 2019 and December 2019 to the employer/Appellant. There was no response from the appellant on the applications. Hence, they filed application under Rule 10 of the Gratuity Rules, 1973 to the competent authority / second respondent herein for direction. After hearing both sides, the second respondent determined the gratuity amounts by following the procedure under Rule 11 of the Gratuity Rules and passed Orders under Section 7 (4) of 'the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972' ('Gratuity Act' for short) vide Orders even dated February 7, 2023 and the same were received by the Appellant on March 17, 2023. Feeling aggrieved by the Orders of the second respondent, the appellant preferred appeals before the Appellate Authority namely the first respondent herein on August 30, 2023. The first respondent returned the appeals on the ground that they were presented 120 days beyond the date of receipt of the Orders under Section 7 (4) of the Gratuity Act (i.e., with a delay of 46 days). Feeling aggrieved, the appellant preferred writ petitions before this Court. Learned Single Judge of this Court after hearing both sides, dismissed the writ petitions on the ground that they were filed beyond the period of 120 days stipulated under Section 7 (7) of the Gratuity Act and further that the reason for the delay of 46 days was not explained satisfactorily. Assailing the Orders passed by the learned Single Judge, the appellant - sugar mill has come up with these writ appeals. The details are as follows:

3. Learned Counsel for the appellant would argue that the appellant deposited the entire Gratuity Amounts along with interest as per Section 7 (7) of the Gratuity Act and on that basis, prayed for condonation of delay by allowing the writ appeals and directing the first respondent to take the statutory appeals under Section 7 (7) of Gratuity Act on file.

4. Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant. Perused the materials available on record.

5. The short question that arises in these writ appeals is whether the Appellate Authority under the Gratuity Act can entertain appeals beyond the period of 120 days (contemplated under Section 7 (7) of the Gratuity Act) from the date of receipt of the Order passed under Section 7 (4) of the Gratuity Act by the aggrieved party.

6. For ease of reference, Section 7 (7) of the Gratuity Act is extracted hereunder:

"7. Determination of the amount of gratuity:--

x x x x x x x x x

7) Any person aggrieved by an order under sub-section (4) may, within sixty days from the date of the receipt of the order, prefer an appeal to the appropriate Government or such other authority as may be specified by the appropriate Government in this behalf.

Provided that the appropriate Government or the appellate authority, as the case may be, may, if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from preferring the appeal within the said period of sixty days, extend the said period by a further period of sixty days.

Provided further that no ap