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

2010 Supreme(HP) 709

HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHARMA, J.
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS.
Petitioners
VERSUS
VIJAY KUMAR AND OTHERS.
Respondents
C.W.P. No. 854 of 2008
Decided on 20-04-2010.

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioners:Mr. Rajinder Dogra, Additional Advocate General. For the Respondents: Nemo.

The main legal point established is that the workman is entitled to gratuity for both the daily wage period of service and the regular period of service, as per the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972.

Headnote:

Gratuity - Labour Law - The court held that the workman is entitled to gratuity for the daily wage period of service under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and for the regular period of service as per CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. The appellate authority's order was in conformity with the law laid down by the court.

Fact of the Case:

The State challenged the order passed by the Joint Labour Commissioner-Cum-Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, regarding the entitlement of the workman to gratuity.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the workman is entitled to gratuity for the daily wage period of service under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and for the regular period of service as per CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. The appellate authority's order was upheld, and the petition was dismissed.

Issues: The issue was whether the workman is entitled to gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on its previous judgments and held that the workman is entitled to gratuity for both the daily wage period of service and the regular period of service, as per the relevant laws.

Final Decision: The petition was dismissed, and the order passed by the appellate authority was upheld.

JUDGMENT

Rajiv Sharma, J.-The State has challenged the order passed by the Joint Labour Commissioner-Cum-Appellate Authority (under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972), dated 25th September, 2007 (Annexure P-1).

2. Material facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that the predecessor of present respondents, Shri Shankar Dass (hereinafter referred to as “the workman” for convenience sake) had filed an application under Section 7 of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 before the Labour Officer-Cum-Controlling Authority, Mandi, H.P. The same was decided on 19.11.2005. State preferred an appeal against the order dated 19.11.2005. The appellate authority decided the same on 25th September, 2007.

3. Mr. Rajinder Dogra, learned Additional Advocate General has vehemently argued that the order passed by the appellate authority is against the law. According to him, workman is neither entitled to gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 nor to service gratuity under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 since he has not worked for a number of years as required under the rules.

4. I have heard Mr. Rajinder Dogra, leanred Additional Advocate General and gone through the pleadings carefully.

5. The question raised in this petition is no more res integra in view of the judgments dated 09.05.2007 and 18.05.2007, rendered by this Court in CWP Nos. 150 of 2004 and 348 of 2004, titled as State of Himachal Pradesh (through Irrigation and Public Health Department) versus Lashkari Ram and Balam Ram respectively. This Court has held that workman is entitled to get the gratuity for the daily wage period of service under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and is also entitled to get the gratuity for regular period of service as per CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. The order passed by the appellate authority is in conformity with the law laid down by this Court. In the present case, the workman has worked for 17 years on daily wage basis and for 2 years on regular basis. A sum of Rs.20,808/- has been directed to be released in favour of workman towards gratuity for 17 years’ daily wage period of service and a sum of Rs.4061/- for 2 years’ regular period of service. The total gratuity amount of workman as per the judgments of this Court dated 09.05.2007 and 18.05.2007 comes to Rs.26,331/-. There is neither any illegality nor any procedural irregularity in the order passed by the appellate authority dated 25th September, 2007 (Annexure P-1). Accordingly, there is no merit in this petition and the same is dismissed. No costs.

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