IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
LANUSUNGKUM JAMIR, RAI CHATTOPADHYAY, JJ.
M/s Delta Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal and Others – Respondents
MAT No. 254 of 2025, MAT No. 2099 of 2024, I.A. No. CAN 1 of 2025
Decided On : 19-01-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. procedural introduction and issues involved (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. background of gratuity claims and orders (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court directives on handling the appeal (Para 5 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. requirements for appeal compliance (Para 6 , 12) |
| 5. appellant's arguments against legal interpretations (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 6. relationship of section 7(4) and 7(7) under the act (Para 18 , 23) |
| 7. interpretation of statutory obligations under gratuity act (Para 19 , 21 , 22) |
| 8. inapplicability of previous case ratios (Para 25 , 26) |
| 9. final dismissal of the appeal and directive for compliance (Para 28 , 29 , 30) |
JUDGMENT :
RAI CHATTOPADHYAY, J.
1. The present appeals are directed against the order dated May 21, 2024, of the Hon’ble Single Judge, in the writ petitions No. WPA 14251 of 2024 and WPA 14512 of 2024. Those have been heard analogously and are being disposed of by dint of this common judgment.
2. The issue involved and determinable is with regard to the amount of statutory deposit to be remitted by the present appellant, before the statutory appellate authority, in case and when the appellant seeks to prefer a statutory appeal before the statutory appellate authority. The relevant facts culminating in to the instant appeals may be discussed in a nut-shell, before going into the disputed question of law.
3. The respondent No.5 [herein after mentioned as ‘the workman’], has been in employment with the appellant jute mill as budli workman, who were superannuated from the service on January 1, 2014. The respondent workmen say that they are entitled for payment of gratuity on their superannuation, though not paid by the appellant/jute mill. Therefore, they have approached the statutory authority for recovery of gratuity amount with interest, by filing applications under section 7 of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 in statutory form in the year 2018.
4. The ‘controlling authority’ has passed its order on June 3, 2022, directing the appellant/jute mill to pay a total sum of Rs.3,92,932/-, including the gratuity and interest. Due to non-compliance of such direction by the present appellant, a certificate was issued against it under section 8 of the said Act of 1972, on October 28, 2022, to the tune of Rs.3,92,932/- and statutory interests. The same has been duly forwarded to the ‘certificate officer’, being the designated statutory authority, for recovery of the amount.
5. The respondents/workmen thereafter have filed writ petitions challenging the inordinate delay and inaction on part of the said statutory authority, to execute the certificate. During hearing of the writ petitions the present appellant has submitted about pendency of a statutory appeal against the determination of the amount of gratuity and interest. Hence, the Court in its order dated October 11, 2023, has disposed of the writ petitions directing the appellate authority, Howrah to dispose of the appeal within 2 months.
6. The appellate authority’s order is dated March 20, 2024, by dint of which the said appellate authority has dismissed the appeal, filed before it by the present appellant/jute mill on the ground inter alia that the present appellant/jute mill has not deposited the stipulated amount of money as per section 7(4) of the Act of 1972, at the time of filing the appeal. It is beneficial for discussion that the said order be quoted, as herein below:
“Order dated: 20.03.2024
The Appellant is present in today's hearing through their authorized representative after filing authorization letter which is accepted and filed. All the above-mentioned appeal petition is heard & considered. The instant appeal petition filed by the Appellant is not inconformity with the provisions of section 7 of the Payment of the Gratuity Act., 1972 which states inter alia:
"(7) Any Person aggrieved by an Order under Sub-Section (4) may..............................................................................................
Provided further that no appeal by an Employer shall be admitted unless a
Employers must comply with statutory deposit requirements before appealing against gratuity determinations; failure to deposit the determined amount renders the appeal inadmissible.
The employer must deposit the entire amount of payment of gratuity determined by the Controlling Authority and prefer an appeal within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of the order. The A....
The term 'amount equal to the amount of gratuity' under the Payment of Gratuity Act includes both gratuity and accrued interest for pre-deposit required to admit an appeal.
A secured creditor cannot be deemed an employer under the Payment of Gratuity Act, thus exempting them from the pre-deposit requirement for appealing a gratuity claim.
Interpreting Act unequivocally indicate that payment of gratuity would not depend upon employee filing an application before employer demanding gratuity but will have to be paid immediately on cessat....
Employer cannot withhold gratuity for unauthorized retention of quarters post-retirement; statutory interest of 10% applies for delayed payment.
Employer's failure to issue Section 7(2) notice renders limitation inapplicable to delayed gratuity claims; special allowance includibility in wages demands factual probe; interest accrues on unpaid ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.