SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Cal) 357

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

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : Amrita Pandey, Sayanwita Auddya
For the Respondents: R. Guha Thakurta, S. Sengupta, Susovan Sengupta, Manas Kumar Sadhu

Employers must comply with statutory deposit requirements before appealing against gratuity determinations; failure to deposit the determined amount renders the appeal inadmissible.

Headnote:(A) Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 - Sections 7(4) and 7(7) - Statutory appeal against gratuity determination - The appellate authority dismissed the appeal due to the employer's failure to deposit the requisite gratuity amount as per Section 7(4) - The High Court affirmed the appellate authority's dismissal, emphasizing that both statutory provisions must be complied with during appeal proceedings. (Paras 6, 25, 28)

(B) Authority’s discretion - The employer's deposit at the time of appeal must equal the amount determined by the controlling authority to ensure the appeal's admissibility and protect the worker’s rights. (Paras 10, 20)

Facts of the case:
The employer, a jute mill, appealed the controlling authority’s order mandating payment of Rs. 3,92,932/- in gratuity and interest to a workman, who alleged non-payment upon superannuation.

Findings of Court:
The Court found the employer's appeal inadmissible as the proper statutory deposit had not been made, affirming the obligation to comply with the Act.

Issues: The key issue involved whether the employer's appeal was maintainable without proper deposit under the Payment of Gratuity Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court established the necessity of adhering to the statutory deposit requirement for an appeal under Section 7(7) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, noting that non-compliance hinders the appeal process.

Result: Appeal dismissed.

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

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top