Paschim Banga Gramin Bank & Ors vs Chinmay Majumdar & Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 333 Cal

20.01.2021
     09
 RP Ct.04
                                      F MA 657 of 2020

                            Paschim Banga Gramin Bank & Ors.
                                        Versus
                                Chinmay Majumdar & Ors.



             Mr. Biswaroop Bhattacharya
             Ms. Surasri Baidya
                                             ....       For Appellants

             Mr. Debabrata Saha Roy
             Mr. Indranath Mitra
             Mr. Subhankar Das
                                             ....       For Respondents

Mr. Saha Roy, learned advocate appears on behalf of respondents and submits, his clients need only to rely on second proviso under sub-regulation (3) in regulation 72. The proviso entitles his clients, as officers, to be paid additional amount of gratuity based on last pay drawn. He submits, pay includes, inter alia, emoluments. Emoluments have been defined to be aggregate of salary and allowances and salary means aggregate of pay and dearness allowance. As such, the dearness allowance is part of the package, for calculation of additional amount of gratuity in the case of his clients being officers. He relies on views of learned single Judges of High Court of Chhattisgarh and High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, by respective judgment dated 31st August, 2020 in, inter alia, Writ Petition (L) no.55 of 2020 (Chhattisgarh Rajya Gramin Bank vs. Meghraj Pathak & Ors. and judgment dated 16th October, 2020 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition no.7359 of 2019 (Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank vs. The Appellate Authority).

We record what we have noticed. Clause (m) in definitions regulation 2 gives meaning of 'pay' to include

emoluments, which may specifically be classified as pay under the Regulations. We have not been shown specific classification of emoluments as pay in the Regulations.

List on 27th January, 2021 for further hearing.

(Arindam Sinha, J.)

(Suvra Ghosh, J)