Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 83860
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
M. Dhandapani, N. Dilip Kumar, JJ
President, Village Panchayat, Silukuvarpatti Panchayat – Appellant
Versus
K. Lakshmanan – Respondent
W.A.(MD)No.746 of 2021|C.M.P.(MD)No.3347 of 2021
For the Appellants/Petitioners: P. Senthoor Pandi
For the Respondents: G. Mohan Kumar
A consequential order for the implementation of a statutory award cannot be challenged if the original award itself was not challenged by the aggrieved party.
Headnote:(A) Labour Law - Payment of Gratuity - Implementation of Award - Where the primary award passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Labour under the Payment of Gratuity Act is not challenged, a subsequent challenge to the consequential order for its implementation cannot be sustained. (Para 3)
Issues: Whether the order for implementation of a gratuity award can be challenged when the original award itself was not contested.
PRAYER:
Writ Appeal filed under Clause XV of the Letters Patent Act, praying to set aside the order dated 21.12.2020 passed in W.P.(MD)No. 16333 of 2015.
For Appellants : Mr.P.Senthoor Pandi
For Respondents 1 & 3 : No appearance
For Respondents 5 to 7 : Mr.G.Mohan Kumar, Additional Government Pleader
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was made by M.DHANDAPANI, J.]
This intra-court appeal has been filed challenging the order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(MD)No.16333 of 2015 dated 21.12.2020.
2. The respondents / writ petitioners filed a Writ Petition before this Court in W.P.(MD)No.16333 of 2015, seeking for a direction to the second respondent therein, to implement the order of the third respondent in his proceedings dated 21.01.2015, ordering to recover the amount from the fourth respondent therein / appellant herein which are due to be paid to the respondents / writ petitioners as per the award of the third respondent in P.G.Nos.2,3,4 & 5 of 2008 dated 31.01.2008. The Writ Petition was disposed of vide order dated 21.12.2020. Challenging the same, the fourth respondent / President has filed the present Writ Appeal before this Court.
3. Without challenging the award passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Labour under the Payment of Gratuity Act, in P.G.Nos. 2,3,4 & 5 of 2008 dated 31.08.2008, challenging the consequential order passed by the third respondent for implementation of the earlier order cannot be sustained by this Court. Hence, there shall be a direction to the respondents 5 & 6 to implement the award passed by the third respondent in P.G.Nos.2,3,4 & 5 of 2008 dated 31.01.2008, within a period of four [4] weeks, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if not already implemented and if there is no legal impediment. The respondents are directed to pay the benefits to the respondents / writ petitioners, on or before 30.09.2026 and file a report before this Court on 30.09.2026, failing which the District Collector, Dindigul District, shall appear in person before this Court on 30.09.2026.
4. With the above directions, this Writ Appeal stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
5. Post the Writ Appeal “for reporting compliance” on 30.09.2026.
