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

2016 Supreme(Ori) 77

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
B.R. SARANGI, J.
The General Manager (P & EEL), Mahanadi Coalfields Limited – Petitioner
Versus
Asim Kumar Chatterjee and Others – Opposite Parties
W.P. (C) No. 9355 of 2015
Decided On : 10-03-2016

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: M/s. Debaraj Mohanty, A. Mishra, B.P. Panda & D. Behera.
For the Opposite Parties : M/s. C.A. Rao, S.K. Behera, S.K. Parida & Mr. M.K. Pradhan.

The main legal point established in the judgment is the employer's obligation to obtain prior written permission for delayed payment of gratuity and the liability to pay interest on delayed gratuity. The judgment also emphasized the employee's entitlement to interest if pensionary benefits are erroneously withheld.

Headnote:

Gratuity - Payment of Gratuity - Act, 1972 - Section 4(6), Section 7(3), Section 7(3-A), Section 7(4)(a) - The court discussed the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, including the employer's obligation to pay gratuity, the arrangement for payment, and the payment of interest in case of delayed payment. The court emphasized the requirement for the employer to obtain prior written permission for delayed payment and the consequences of failing to do so. The judgment highlighted the employer's liability to pay interest on delayed payment of gratuity and the employee's entitlement to interest if pensionary benefits are erroneously withheld.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought to quash an order directing payment of gratuity and interest to the respondent. The respondent, a retired employee, had filed a claim petition for the unpaid gratuity amount. The petitioner had deposited the gratuity amount but failed to obtain prior written permission for delayed payment.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioner failed to comply with the requirement for obtaining prior written permission for delayed payment, leading to the liability to pay interest on delayed gratuity. The court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the order for payment of gratuity and interest to the respondent.

Issues: The issues revolved around the employer's obligation to pay gratuity, the requirement for obtaining prior written permission for delayed payment, and the entitlement of the employee to interest on delayed gratuity payment.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of obtaining prior written permission for delayed payment of gratuity and highlighted the employer's liability to pay interest in case of delayed payment. The judgment established the employee's entitlement to interest if pensionary benefits are erroneously withheld.

Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, affirming the order for payment of gratuity and interest to the respondent.

JUDGMENT :

B.R. Sarangi, J.

1. The General Manager (P/EEL), Mohanadi Coal Fields Limited, Burla, Sambalpur, being the petitioner, has filed this petition seeking to quash the order dated 23.04.2015 passed by the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and Regional Labour Commission (Central), Rourkela in Application No. 36(2)/2014-RKL-R vide Annexure-8 by which direction has been given to the petitioner to pay the gratuity amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- along with interest @ 10% per annum calculated at Rs.3,22,192/- within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the order.

2. The epitome of the facts is that opposite party no.1 who was working as General Manager(Finance) under the Mahanadi Coalfield Ltd. joined in service on 05.03.1974 and retired on 31.12.2011 and has put in 37 years 9 months 27 days continuous service in various locations. The last wages drawn by the opposite party no.1 was Rs. 1,05,552.81 per month. He is also entitled to get total gratuity to the tune of Rs. 10,00,000/- which has not been paid by the petitioner. Therefore, opposite party no.1 filed a claim petition before the Controlling Authority to pay the gratuity amount together with interest for the delayed payment and also filed an application for condonation of delay. Accordingly notice was issued on 28.12.2011 in the prescribed Form “L” as required under Rule 8(1) of the Payment of Gratuity (Central) Rules, 1972 in short the Rules 1972 for payment of gratuity. The petitioner was intimated about sanction of Rs.10,00,000/- towards gratuity and such notice was also issued under the Act only when the claim is found to be admissible on verification. Since the petitioner did not comply with the assurance, opposite party no.1 requested the petitioner time and again both orally and in writing to release the gratuity amount. After waiting for quite long time, he had prayed to the Internal Grievance Redressal Forum, Ministry of Coal, Government of India. As the application could not be filed in time, he stated the reasons that such delay in filing the application was neither deliberate nor intentional but for bona-fide intention to settle the matter without approaching the adjudicating mechanism. When the matter was pending before the appropriate forum, the petitioner deposited the gratuity amount of Rs.10,00,000/- before the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, in short, “the Act, 1972” and after due adjudication, the Controlling Authority directed to pay the gratuity amount along with interest @ 10% per annum as notified by the Government of India vide notification bearing No. S.O. 874(E) dated 01.10.1987 for the period from 01.02.2012 till the date of order i.e. 23.04.2015 (1176 days) which comes to Rs. 3,22,192/-. Hence this petition.

3. Mr. D. Mohanty, learned Counsel for the petitioner stated that as per the office memorandum dated 10.07.2006, it is mandatory on the part of the employer to take vigilance/departmental clearances before release of the gratuity. Accordingly, vigilance clearance was sought from the South Eastern Coalfields Limited where the opposite party no.1 was previously posted. The petitioner was informed vide Fax massage dated 18.01.2012 of the Dy. Manager (P/EE)/SECL that two CBI cases bearing R.C. 1242011A0013 dated 30.11.2011 and RC1242011A0015 are pending against opposite party no.1 in respect of criminal conspiracy and cheating for getting coal for 16 and 12 MW CPP which resulted in high pecuniary gain to M/s. Mahendra Sponge & Power Pvt. Ltd. Raipur & M/s. Rashmi Sponge Iron & Power Industries Ltd. Raipur. Pursuant to the said letter dated 18.01.2012 the petitioner raised a dispute on 28.04.2012 before the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) and Controlling Authority under Section 7(4) of the Act, 1972 and deposited Rs.10,00,000/- vide demand draft bearing No.122235 dated 26.04.2012 in respect of the gratuity amount of opposite party no.1 and also made a prayer to take a decisio















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