BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 17.11.2025 CORAM :

THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI WP.(MD)Nos.5225, 5226, 5227, 5228, 5229 & 5230 of 2023 and WMP.(MD)Nos.4919, 4920, 4928, 4921, 4926 & 4922 of 2023 The Commissioner, Office of the Dindigul Corporation, Dindigul District. ... Petitioner in all WPs.

Vs.

1.The Controlling Authority under Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972/

Deputy Commissioner of Labour(P), The Office of the Joint Commissioner of Labour, Dindigul, Dindigul Town & District.

... 1st Respondent in all WPs.

2.P.Chinnamma ...2^ndRespondent in WP.(MD)No.5225 of 2023 3.R.Arukani ... 2^ndRespondent in WP.(MD)No.5226 of 2023 4.P.Kaliyammal ... 2^ndRespondent in WP.(MD)No.5227 of 2023 5.T.Mariammal ... 2^ndRespondent in WP.(MD)No.5228 of 2023 6.K.Subbbammal ... 2^ndRespondent in WP.(MD)No.5229 of 2023

7.M.Lakshmi ... 2^ndRespondent in WP.(MD)No.5230 of 2023 Common Prayer :Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned orders made in P.G.Nos.4 of 2022, 19 of 2021, 1 of 2022, 5 of 2022, 2 of 2022 and 3 of 2022 on the file of the first respondent dated 19.01.2023 and quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.Lawrance (in all WPs.)

For R1 : Mr.C.Venkatesh Kumar, (in all WPs.) Special Government Pleader.

For R2 : Mr.s.Sarvagan Prabhu (in all WPs.)

COMMON ORDER

The Commissioner of Dindigul Corporation has filed these writ petitions as against the orders dated 19.01.2023 passed by the first respondent, authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 [hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’] in directing the petitioner/Corporation to pay the gratuity to the private respondents/employees in the writ petitions. Since the issue involved in all these writ petitions are one and the same, all these writ petitions are taken up together and disposed of by this common order.

2.The private respondents/employees have filed claim petitions before the Deputy Commissioner of Labour praying for gratuity for the period of service rendered by them in the petitioner /Corporation. The petitioner/Corporation was functioning as Municipality and they have engaged the private respondents as Sweepers and their service was regularised with effect from 01.07.2006. These employees have also retired from service and they have been settled with all the terminal benefits. However, they have approached the Deputy Commissioner of Labour for the payment of gratuity as per the Act. The Deputy Commissioner of Labour by his order dated 19.01.2023 has allowed those applications filed by the employees and directed the petitioner/Corporation to pay the gratuity amount due to the employees together with interest at the rate of

10%, within a period of 30 days.

3.When all these writ petitions were taken up for hearing on

10.03.2023, this Court has granted on order of interim stay on condition to deposit a sum of Rs.75,000/- each to the credit of the petition mentioned gratuity case before the first respondent, within a period of six weeks. 4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner / Corporation submits that all these employees have been regularised only in the year 2006. By that time, CPS scheme has been introduced and therefore, they are all covered under this CPS scheme and they are not entitled for the gratuity amount as per the old scheme. He further submits that these employees have been regularised only pursuant to an agreement arrived between the parties and now, they cannot claim for a gratuity after receiving all the retirement benefits, which were provided to these employees at the time of retirement. According to him, these employees have been engaged only as substitute sanitary workers, whenever the permanent employees of the corporation went on leave. Therefore, they will not come under the definition of an employee under the Act. He also submits that the petitioner/Corporation is a State Government undertaking and therefore, as per the def