Back
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA
Arindam Lodh, J.
Mrinal Kanti Das - Appellant
Versus
Tripura Road Transport Corporation And 3 Others - Respondent
WP(C) No. 955 of 2021
Decided On : 12-05-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition filed for gratuity payment (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioner entitled to revised gratuity amount (Para 3) |
| 3. respondent recalculated gratuity amount (Para 4) |
| 4. entitlement to penal interest on deferred gratuity (Para 5 , 6) |
| 5. writ petition allowed and disposed (Para 7) |
JUDGMENT
1. Heard Mr. P. Roy Barman, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. K. Nath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. Bhattacharya, learned GA assisted by Ms. S. Nag, learned counsel appearing for the State-respondent and Mr. K. C. Bhattacharya, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-TRTC.
2. By means of filing the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:
'(i) Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or order/orders and/or direction/directions of like nature shall not be issued whereby directing the Respondents to make the full and final payment of Gratuity with interest @ 9% per annum to the Petitioner, w.e.f., 03.03.2020 to 01.07.2021, on deferred payment of Rs. 10,00,000/- which paid on 01.07.2021.
(ii) Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or order/orders and/or direction/directions of like nature shall not be issued whereby directing the Respondents to make the full and final payment of Gratuity (Rs. 1,23,962/-) with interest @ 9% per annum on Rs. 1,23,962/- to the Petitioner w.e.f. 03.03.2020, till date of payment.
(iii) Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or order/orders and/or direction/directions of like nature shall not be issued whereby quashing and cancelling the notification, dated, 05.05.2009, issued by the Finance Department, Govt of Tripura.
(iv) Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or order/orders and/or direction/directions of like nature shall not be issued whereby quashing and cancelling Rule 8 of the TCS (Revised Pension) Rules, 2009.
(v) Make the rules absolute.
(vi) Call for records.
(vii) Pass any further order/orders as this Hon'ble High Court considered fit and proper.
3. On consideration of the statements made in the writ petition as well as the records annexed thereto and having heard the submissions of the learned counsels appearing for the parties, it comes to light that the petitioner retired on 31.01.2020. He was paid gratuity amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- on 01.07.2021 by the respondent-TRTC. But, the petitioner was entitled to receive gratuity at the revised ceiling limit at Rs. 20 lakh.
4. Mr. K. Bhattacharya, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-TRTC has submitted that they have recalculated the gratuity amount and it comes to Rs. 1,23,961/- which will be paid very soon.
5. It is the position of law that if there is deferred payment of gratuity, then, the employee will be entitled to penal interest.
6. Accordingly, I direct the respondent-TRTC to pay interest @ 7% per annum on the amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- from 03.03.2020 to 01.07.2021. Further, the petitioner will be entitled to get interest @ 7% per annum for balance amount of Rs. 1,23,961 /- till the date of the actual payment.
7. With the aforesaid direction, the instant writ petition stands allowed and disposed.
Entitlement to delayed gratuity payments includes the right to receive penal interest, reinforcing statutory obligations of payment by public authorities.
Delayed payment of gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 incurs interest at 7% per annum, and statutory revisions to gratuity entitlements must be honored.
The amendment of the Payment of Gratuity Act to increase the ceiling limit entitles retired employees to receive additional gratuity payments under the updated provisions.
Employees are entitled to gratuity payments as per revised ceiling limits established by the Payment of Gratuity (Amendment) Act, 2018, regardless of employers' financial constraints.
The court held that under the Payment of Gratuity Act, retirees are entitled to full gratuity payments up to Rs.20,00,000 with interest of 7.5% due to untimely payments.
Employees' rightful entitlement to salaries and pensions, and the need for equitable considerations in cases of deferred payments.
Interest under the Payment of Gratuity Act is due from the date of entitlement unless hindered by claim delays, resulting in dismissal of a petition for earlier interest claims.
The right to interest on delayed gratuity payments is statutory and mandatory under Section 7(3-A) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.
Employer must pay gratuity within 30 days of becoming payable; failure incurs liability for interest as per the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.
The central legal principle established is that gratuity, as a retirement benefit, must be determined and paid to eligible employees in a timely manner as mandated by The Payment of Gratuity Act, 197....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
