IMPORTANT POINT
The Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act is deemed a Tribunal, and appeals against its orders must follow statutory provisions, limiting the scope for intra-court appeals.

JUDGMENT :

Alok Kumar Verma, J.

This intra-court appeal has been filed assailing the order dated 26.02.2024, passed in Writ Petition No.498 of 2024 (M/S), “M/s Saraswati Dynamic Limited vs. Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and Another”, whereby, the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition.

2. Heard Mr. Gopal Narayan, Advocate with Mr. Amar Murti Shukla, Advocate for the appellant and Mr. K.N. Joshi, Deputy Advocate General for the respondent no.1.

3. Mr. K.N. Joshi raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of this intra-court appeal. He contended that the impugned order under writ petition dated 20.12.2023 was passed by the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. The “Controlling Authority” is a Tribunal. Therefore, no Special Appeal is maintainable under the provisions of Rule 5 of Chapter VIII of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952, applicable to High Court of Uttarakhand under U.P. Re-Organization Act,2000, against the order dated 26.02.2024, passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.498 of 2024 (M/S), which was filed by the appellant-writ petitioner against the order dated 20.12.2023, passed by the Controlling Authority.

4. Mr. Gopal Narayan, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, opposed the said submission and contended that this Special Appeal is maintainable.

5. In order to appreciate the issue which arises at the preliminary stage of this Special Appeal, a brief reference to the factual back ground is necessary, which is as follows:-

The respondent no.2 was employed under the employment of the appellant in the month of November, 1990. He worked under the appellant from 1990 upto 22nd August, 2008. The petitioner had calculated the gratuity and other admissible amount and after informing the respondent no.2 transferred to his account on 26.02.2009. Respondent no.2 received payment of Rs.51,862/-. Respondent no.2 did not raise any objection. The petitioner had received a notice from the office of respondent no.1 along with a copy of Application, filed by respondent no.2 on 23.02.2021. The petitioner filed reply to the said Application in which the petitioner took a specific plea that the Application, filed by the respondent no.2, is not maintainable; the claim of respondent no.2 is barred by limitation, and, the respondent no.2 accepted the amount of gratuity on 26.02.2009, deposited by the petitioner in terms of the provisions contained in the Payment Of Gratuity Act, 1972. The respondent no.1 allowed the claim of the respondent no.2 on 20.12.2023. As per the petitioner, the petitioner has no other alternative, efficacious and speedy remedy. Therefore, the petitioner filed the writ petition with following reliefs :

“(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order/judgment dated 20.12.2023 (Annexure-4) issued by respondent no.1.

(ii) Issue any other order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

(iii) Award cost of the petition.”

6. The learned Single Judge observed that the petitioner has challenged the order dated 20.12.2023, passed by Controlling Authority, under Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. Since the order impugned in the writ petition is appealable under Section 7 (7) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, therefore, the Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition. Consequently, the writ petition has been dismissed with liberty to petitioner to approach the appellate authority.

7. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant-writ petitioner is before us.

8. Before we examine the contentions of both the parties, it is necessary to consider the scope of Rule 5 of the Chapter VIII of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 which makes provisions for an intra-court appeal. Rule 5 of the Chapter VIII of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 reads as under :-

“An appeal shall lie to the Court from a judgment not being a judgment passed in the exer