IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side Present:

The Hon’ble Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul)

WPA 3629 of 2025 Food Corporation of India Vs.

Union of India & Ors.

For the Petitioner : Mr. Devajyoti Barman.

For the Respondent nos. 1 to 3 : Mr. Brijendra Pratap Singh, Mr. Avinash Kankani.

Hearing concluded on : 06.05.2025 Judgment on : 19.05.2025 SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL), J. :

1. The present writ application has been preferred against an order passed by the Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act 1972 and Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner (Central) at Asansol, West Bardhaman, West Bengal in Appeal No. PG-

17/2024-E on 17.09.2024.

2. The said Appellate Authority was considering an appeal preferred against an order of the Controlling Authority who had directed as follows:-

“……….The applicant submitted during the hearing that her husband has joined in FCI on 07/02/1988 and expired on 25/04/2017 after rendering 29 years of service but, she has not yet received the gratuity in spite of submission of claim. Therefore, she prayed for payment of gratuity in her favour. The applicant submitted Copies of Form 16 of her husband Lt. Basu Das for 2016-17 related to income tax issued by the opponent alongwith copy of letter claiming gratuity. She has also submitted copy of Affidavit dated 29.5.17 showing her as wife of Lt. Basu Das.

The Opponent submitted that the husband of applicant was 'No Work No Pay Worker' and not the 'Permanent worker' therefore, not entitled for gratuity. However, as per direction of this Authority they have submitted gratuity calculation statement in respect of the applicant showing date of joining of applicant as 27/7/2001 and date of expiry as 25/04/17 and last wages as Rs.39404/- (Basic

18150/- + DA 21254/-)…..”

3. The Appellate Authority vide an order dated 31^st January, 2023 upheld the order of the Controlling Authority.

4. Being aggrieved the petitioner approached the High Court in WPA

28432 of 2023 wherein vide order dated 08.04.2024, the Court permitted the petitioner to adduce additional evidence in respect of the requirement of the workman having put in 240 days in a year continuously for 5 years.

5. The Appellate Authority on rehearing the appeal, on the direction of the High Court, noted as follows:-

“………The Appellant submitted appeal petition to this office on 29/05/2024 and accordingly notices were issued to both the parties and hearing made on 24/06/2024, 26/07/2024, 20/08/2024 and finally concluded on 10/09/2024. Even after repeated requests no additional evidence/documents were made available by the parties. At last, the FCI management has submitted a list of the workers who has worked in their establishment year wise which has not been contested by the respondent who has worked in their establishment year wise which has not been contested by the respondent employee…..”

And finally directed as follows:-

“Accordingly, the additional gratuity is determined as under:

Last wages drawn: Rs. 39404.00(Basic: Rs. 18150.00, DA: Rs. 21254.00)

Wages per day: Rs. 39404.00/26= Rs. 1515.53 No. of days gratuity entitled: 06x15=90days Gratuity amount: Rs. 1515.53x90=Rs. 1,36,398.00 (Rupees One Lakh thirty six thousand three hundred and ninety eight only).

However, both the parties have not been able to clarify whether this gratuity has already been paid to the employee as a part of earlier gratuity payment……….”

6. The present writ has been preferred contending that the chart submitted by the them shows that the workman did not put in 240 days of work in a year, for 5 years continuously and as such is not entitled to any gratuity as he does not meet the requirements under the law.

7. On perusal of the order referred to above, it is not clear as to what the Appellate authority meant while directing payment of additional gratuity and also its query “whether this gratuity has already been paid to the employee as a part of the earlier gratuity payment”

8. From the records there is nothing to indicate tha