← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/125/2016dismissed

The General Manager Region Food Corporation Of India v. The Union Of India And ORS

2017-11-29Mr. Justice Ashwani Kumar Singh4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.125 of 2016 =========================================================== The General Manager (Region) Food Corporation of India, Regional Office, Arunachal Building, Exhibition Road, Patna - 800001. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Labour & Employment, New Delhi.

2. The Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), Patna -cum-Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 Maurya Lok Complex, 2nd Floor, Patna - 800001.

3. The Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central)-cum-Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, Maurya Lok Complex, 2nd Floor, Patna - 800001.

4. Shri Nagendra Prasad Singh, ex-Manager (General), Resident of Krishna Toli, Road No. 4, Brahampura, P.O. - M.I.T., District - Muzaffarpur, PIN - 842003. .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. P. K. Verma, Sr. Advocate Mr. Suman Kumar Jha, Advocate Mr. Dr.Mankeshwar Tiwari, Advocate For the Respondent/s Mr. S.D. Sanjay (Addl. Soc. Gen.) =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 29-11-2017 This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for the following reliefs:- (i) For quashing the order dated 27.05.2015 passed in Appeal Case No.36/29/2015Appeal/RLC, by the Appellate Authority under

2/4 the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), Patna (Annexure-5) whereby he has dismissed the appeal filed by the management of the Food Corporation of India (FCI) under Section 7(7) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 read with Rule 18 of the Payment of Gratuity (Central) Rules, against the order dated 27.12.2013/01.01.2014 of the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central)-cum-Controlling Authority under the payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.

(ii) For quashing the order dated 27.12.2013/01.01.2014 passed by the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central), Patna-cumControlling Authority under the payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 in file No. 48/24/2013/ALC.II (Annexure-3) whereby the writ petitioner has been directed for making the payment of gratuity with interest amounting to Rs.11,35,000/- (Rs.10,00,000/- + Rs.01,35,000/-) to the respondent no. 4, despite the fact that he had been found guilty of charges of grave misconduct amounting to moral turpitude in a departmental disciplinary proceeding and a penalty of dismissal from service with forfeiture of gratuity and other terminal benefits had been imposed by the Competent Disciplinary Authority, and, as such he was not entitled to any payment of gratuity as long as the order of forfeiture of

3/4 gratuity remained.

2.

The Appellate Authority dismissed Appeal Case No.36/29/2015-Appeal/RLC filed by the petitioner vide order dated 27.05.2015 on the ground that the appellant failed to comply with the mandatory provision prescribed under sub-section (7) of Section 7 of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and did not deposit the amount of gratuity with interest as directed by the Controlling Authority.

3.

Mr. P. K. Verma, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner submitted that the Appellate Authority erred in law in dismissing the appeal without adjudicating the issues and points raised by the appellant in appeal. He submitted that by passing the impugned order dated 27.05.2015, the Appellate Authority has virtually deprived and denied the appellant from his right of statutory appeal provided under sub-section (7) of Section 7 of the Payment of Gratuity Act. According to him, the impugned order is bad in law, as the same has been passed without first considering and deciding the exemption petition from deposit filed before it along with the appeal.

4.

The issues and points raised by the petitioner in writ petition are exactly the same as raised in the matter of the General Manager (Region), Food Corporation of India, Regional Office,

4/4 Patna vs. The Union of India & Ors. (CWJC No. 8619 of 2016), which has already been decided by this Court vide judgment dated 12.05.2017.

5.

In that view of the matter, for the reasons assigned in the aforestated case, vide judgment dated 12.05.2017, the writ petition is dismissed.

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.) Kanchan/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date01.12.2017 Transmission Date NA