The Punjab State Cooperative Supply And Marketing Federation Limited v. Uttam Singh And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH 202+256 (02 cases)+259+260 (03 cases) +261+262+265+276+ 282+293+295 CWP-1543-2020 Date of Decision : 13.11.2024 THE PUNJAB STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LIMITED .... PETITIONER V/S UTTAM SINGH AND OTHERS .... RESPONDENTS Sr. No.

Case No.(O&M) Parties Name 1.

CWP-20688-2019 PUNJAB STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LTD V/S PAWAN KUMAR SEHGAL AND ORS 2.

CWP-13127-2020 PUNJAB STATE CO-OPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LTD.

V/S JUGRAJ SINGH AND OTHERS 3.

CWP-31001-2019 PUNJAB STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LTD V/S APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, 1972 AND DEPUTY CHIEF LABOUR COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL), CHANDIGARH AND OTHERS 4.

CWP-35214-2019 THE PUNJAB STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LTD V/S SHYAM LAL AND OTHERS 5.

CWP-16106-2021 THE PUNJAB STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LTD V/S RAJ KUMAR AND ORS 6.

CWP-3937-2023 THE PUNJAB STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LTD V/S APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, 1972-CUM-

ADDITIONAL LABOUR COMMISSIONER, PUNJAB AND OTHERS 7.

CWP-35697-2019 THE PUNJAB STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LTD V/S GURDEV SINGH AND OTHERS 8.

CWP-3374-2020 THE PUNJAB STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LTD V/S RAGHBIR SINGH AND ORS 9.

CWP-6904-2020 THE PUNJAB STATE CO-OPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LTD V/S THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACTCUM-DEPUTY CHIEF LABOUR COMMISSIONER, CHANDIGARH AND ANOTHER 10.

CWP-18404-2021 THE PUNJAB STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LTD V/S GURMAIL SINGH AND OTHERS 11.

CWP-11432-2022 THE PUNJAB STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LTD AND ANOTHER V/S APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, 1972-CUMADDITIONAL LABOUR COMMISSIONER, PUNJAB AND OTHERS 12.

CR-436-2023 THE PUNJAB STATE CO-OPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LTD. V/S APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, 1972-CUMADDITIONAL LABOUR COMMISSIONER, PUNJAB AND OTHERS 13.

CWP-2726-2023 THE PUNJAB STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LIMITED AND ANOTHER V/S JANESH KUMAR AND OTHERS

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present :- Mr.Kavinder S.Chhibber, Advocate for Mr. T.V.S.Lehal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Ankit Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner in CWP-20688-2019 CWP-13127-2020.

Mr. Vikas Singh, Advocate and Ms. Anamika Sheoran, Advocate for the petitioner in CWP-35214-2019, CWP-16106-2021, CWP-3937-2023, CWP-35697-2019, CWP-18404-2021 and CWP-11432-2022.

Ms. Pushpanjali Bisht, Advocate for Mr. T.S.Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner in CWP No.16106 of 2023, CWP-3937-2023 and CWP-2726-2023.

Mr. Aman Dhir, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Shiv Kumar, Advocate Mr. Lovedev Singh, Advocate Mr. Raman Kaplish, Advocate for the respondents in all cases.

Mr. Piyush Khanna, Advocate for the respondents in CWP-35214-2019 CWP-16106-2021 and CWP-3937-2023.

Mr. Mandeep Singh Kaler, Advocate for respondent No.1 in CWP-20688-2019 and CWP-13127-2020.

Mr. Labh Singh Sandhu, Advocate for respondent No.3 in CWP-3937-2023.

**** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral) 1.

By this common order, the above-noted petitions are hereby adjudicated as issues involved and prayer sought in all the petitions are

common. For the sake of convenience and with the consent of parties, the facts are borrowed from CWP-1543-2020.

2.

The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of order dated 26.12.2017 (Annexure P-1) whereby Controlling Authority has directed to pay gratuity and order dated 29.10.2018 (Annexure P-2) whereby Appellate Authority has dismissed its appeal on the ground of delay.

3.

The petitioner is a State Government undertaking. The workman of the petitioner preferred an application before Controlling Authority constituted under Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (for short '1972 Act'). The said application came to be allowed vide order dated 26.12.2017. The petitioner failed to prefer an appeal within limitation period. The Appellate Authority dismissed its appeal on the ground that delay beyond 60 days cannot be condoned and in the instant case, delay is beyond permissible limit.

4.

Mr. Ankit Kumar, Advocate submits that the appellate authority cannot condone delay beyond 60 days, however, this Court in exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India can condone delay even beyond 60 days. The petitioner is having a good case on merits, thus, it should not be deprived from contesting its case on merits.

5.

Proviso to sub-section (7) of Section 7 of 1972 Act categorically provides that Appellate Authority may condone delay of

maximum of 60 days. For the ready reference, Section 7(7) of 1972 Act is reproduced as below:- "(7) Any person aggrieved by an order under sub-section

(4) may, within sixty days from the date of the receipt 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:

Provided 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 sixty days, extend the said period by a further period of sixty days." 6.

Concededly the petitioner preferred appeal before Appellate Authority beyond maximum period of delay which could be condoned. 7.

On being confronted with judgment of Supreme Court in 'Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTU, Kakinada and ors. Vs. M/s Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited (2020) 19 SCC 681, Mr. Ankit Kumar, Advocate expressed his inability to distinguish his case from the said judgment.

8.

In view of judgment of Supreme Court in M/s Glaxo Smith (Supra), writ petitions cannot be entertained, thus, dismissed. 9.

Pending miscellaneous application (s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

13.11.2024 (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) anju JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No