High Court of DelhiW.P.(C)/401/2017

Sukirti Sawhney v. Govt Of NCT Of Delhi And ORS

2017-01-16Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Valmiki J. Mehta2 pages

$-23 & *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 399/2017 & CM No. 1831/2017(exemption) MANEESHA VERMA Petitioner Through;

Mr. Raj Singh Phogat, Adv.

versus GOVT OF NOT OF DELFII AND ORS Respondents Through;

Mr. Uday Chauhan, Adv. for Ms. Sunita Bansal, Adv. for R-1 and R-2.

+ W.P.(C) 401/2017 & CM No. 1834/2017(Exemption) SUKIRTI SAWHNEY Petitioner Through;

Mr. Raj Singh Phogat, Adv.

versus GOVT OF NOT OF DELHI AND ORS Respondents Through;

Mr. Uday Chauhan, Adv. for Ms. Sunita Bansal, Adv. for R-1 and R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKIJ. MEHTA

ORDER

% 16.01.2017 1.

I have recently held in the judgment in the case of Ms. Neeru Abrol Vs. Chairman and Managing Director, National Fertilizers Limited and Anr., decided on 16.12.2016 in W.P.(C) 4510/2016 that disputes as to payment of gratuity cannot be entertained by this Court in a writ petition inasmuch as there is a specific authority which is created under the Payment W.P.(C) 399/2017 & conn.

Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing.

of Gratuity Act, 1972 for deciding the disputes as to payment of gratuity. The relevant provisions in this regard are contained in various sub-sections of Section 7(4) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. 2.

These writ petitions are allowed to be withdrawn as prayed with liberty to the petitioners to approach the competent authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.

The petitions are accordingly disposed of.

VALMIKIJ. MEHTA,J JANUARY 16, 2017 ib W.P.(C) 399/2017 & conn.

p^gg 2 of 2