##PAGE1##

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 7124 of 2026

M/S Tej Shoe Tech

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

District Consumer Commission II Agra And

Another

.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Piyush Bhargava

Counsel for Respondent(s) :

Court No. - 9

HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.

1. Petitioner before this Court is an employer, while respondent no. 2 was

an employee. After respondent no. 2 left the job, he had filed a complaint

before the District Consumer Commission, Agra claiming his gratuity,

provident fund, salary of February 2011, leave encashment and deduction

of salary. The said complaint was numbered as Case No. 623 of 2011.

The said compliant case was allowed on 11.5.2015 and petitioner was

directed to pay the gratuity amount to the respondent no. 2. Against the

order of Commission an appeal was preferred before the State Consumer

Dispute Redressal Commission, which was dismissed, against which

petitioner had approached this Court through Writ-C No. 3169 of 2025

which was dismissed on 5.2.2025 on the ground of alternative remedy

that a second appeal lies before the National Consumer Disputes

Redressal Commission, New Delhi.

2. Thereafter, respondent no. 2