JUDGMENT

Mr. Harsh Bunger, J. (Oral)

Petitioners have filed the instant writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 29.05.2012 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (for short `the Act, 1972') and also the order dated 16.08.2016 (Annexure P-5) passed by the Appellate Authority under the Act, 1972.

2. Briefly, respondent No.3-Workman (Azad Singh) filed an application under the Act, 1972 against the present petitioners, seeking a direction to them to make the payment of gratuity amount of Rs.80,810/- with interest @ 12% p.a. w.e.f. 05.11.2001 till realization. It was the case of respondent No.3 that he had worked as a Salesman with the Haryana State Federation of Consumers Co-op. Wholesale Stores Limited (CONFED) from 13.08.1981 upto 05.11.2001, when his services were terminated. It was claimed that no amount of gratuity had been paid to him and his last drawn salary was Rs.6670/- per month. Accordingly, he filed a petition under the Act, 1972.

3. The aforesaid application was contested by the petitioners herein, inter alia, on the plea that respondent No.3 was charge-sheeted vide letter dated 14.05.1998 for remaining absent from his duties without leave and also that he had committed fraud/dis-honesty during performance of his duties and was accordingly dismissed from the services due to his illegal acts and conduct. It was submitted that since respondent No.3 was dismissed vide order dated 05.11.2001; accordingly, he is not entitled for any gratuity amount. Another plea regarding maintainability of the application was also taken.

4. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Controlling Authority under the Act, 1972 framed the following issues :-

(1) Whether this petition is not maintainable ?

(2) Whether applicant is entitled for gratuity, if so to what extent ?

(3) Relief, if any ?

5. After considering the material/evidence on the record, the Controlling Authority under the Act, 1972, vide order dated 29.05.2012 (Annexure P-3) held that the petition was maintainable and respondent No.3 was entitled to gratuity under Section 4(1)(b) of the Act, 1972. Respondent no.3 was further held entitled to Rs.80,810/- as gratuity amount along with interest @ 10% p.a., by holding as under :-

"8. The applicant is entitled to gratuity amount of Rs.80,810 (Eighty Thousand Eight Hundred and Ten) alongwith interest at the rate of ten per cent per annum as the rate of simple interest for the period from 05.12.2001 till the payment is made by the respondents. Both the respondents are jointly and severally liable to make the payment. The issues, as such, is decided accordingly.

6. Being dis-satisifed with the afore-said order dated 29.05.2012 (Annexure P-3), the petitioners herein filed an appeal No.001 of 2016 under Section 7 (7) of the Act, 1972, on 08.02.2016; accordingly, application for condonation of delay was also filed, which was contested by respondent No.3. The Appellate Authority under the Act, 1972, Rohtak vide order dated 16.08.2016 dismissed the application filed by the petitioners herein for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal was also dismissed.

7. In the afore-mentioned circumstances, the petitioners have filed the instant writ petition before this Court.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the learned Appellate Authority under the Act, 1972, has erred in law and facts in dismissing the appeal only on the aspect of limitation and that too without considering other aspects/merits of the matter.

9. On the other hand, learned counsel