Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Hemant Chandangoudar, J
R.Narayanasamy – Appellant
Versus
The Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act – Respondent
W.P.(MD)No.31894 of 2025|W.M.P(MD)No.25083 of 2025|W.M.P(MD)No.27732 of 2025|P.G.I.A.No.30/2024|P.G.I.A.No.32/2024
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to appellate order rejecting delay condonation in gratuity appeal (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. statutory 60+60 day limit for gratuity appeals (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. no illegality in rejecting delay; writ dismissed (Para 5 , 6) |
ORDER
The petitioners, who are the employees of the third respondent before this Court challenging the order dated 11.09.2025 passed by the first respondent in PGIA.No.30 of 2024 and 32 of 2024. By the said order, the delay of 82 days in filing the appeal under Section 7 (7) of the Payment of Gratuity Act came to be considered.
2. The controlling authority passed an order directing the third respondent to pay a sum of Rs.7.8 lakhs towards payment of gratuity against which the third respondent filed an appeal under Section 7(7) of the Payment of Gratuity Act. The said section stipulates that the appeal should be filed within 60 days from the date of order.
3. Section 7(7) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, states that any person aggrieved by an order under sub-section(4) may, within 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, prefer an appeal to the appropriate Government or such other authority as may be specified by the appropriate Government in this behalf. Proviso states that the appropriate Government or the appellate authority, as the case may be, may, if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from preferring the appeal within the said period of 60 days, extend the said period by a further period of 60 days.”
4. In the instant case, the petitioner filed the appeal after 82 days from the date of order. The learned counsel for the petitioners states that the condonation of delay application was filed on 18.09.2024.
5. Learned Additional Government Pleader, on receiving instructions states that the appeal as well as the application for condonation of delay had been filed on 21.06.2024 and it was returned and represented on 18.09.2024 and therefore the contention of the petitioners that the application for condonation have filed after 120 days is unfounded and mis-conceived. I do not find any illegality in the impugned order passed by the first respondent.
6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
