Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sandip Singha & Ors vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 9 February, 2023
Form No.J(2)
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
Present :
The Hon'ble Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury
WPA 27157 of 2022
Sandip Singha & Ors.
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
For the petitioners : Mr. Bikash Shaw
For the respondent no.3 : Mr. Apurba Kumar Ghosh,
Mr. Rudranil Ghosh,
Mr. Annyasha Chakraborty
Heard on : 09.02.2023
Judgment on : 09.02.2023
Raja Basu Chowdhury, J:
1. Affidavit of service filed in Court is kept with the record.
2. At the very outset, Mr. Shaw, learned advocate appearing for
the petitioners submits that the present writ application
pertains to four several proceedings pending before the
controlling authority constituted under the Payment of
Gratuity Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the "said Act").
Since, the cause of action for each of the petitioners are
distinct and separate, he elects to maintain the present writ
application insofar as the petitioner no. 1 is concerned. In
view thereof, insofar as the petitioner nos. 2 to 4 are
concerned, the same be dismissed as withdrawn with liberty
to file afresh on the self-same cause of action.
3. The present writ application has been filed, inter alia, praying
for a direction upon the respondent no.2 to forthwith dispose
of the gratuity proceedings pending before him. The petitioner
no. 1 claims to be the legal heir of one, Bimal Kumar Singha
(hereinafter to as the "deceased workman"), who during his
life time was employed with the respondent no. 3. It is
submitted that the deceased workman had been appointed
sometime in the year 1977. Despite putting 29 years of
service, since the respondent no. 3 did not make payment of
the gratuity, the deceased workman was constrained to file an
application in "Form-I" before the respondent no. 3. Since, the
respondent no. 3 did not comply with his request in "Form-I",
an application in "Form-N" was filed by the deceased
workman before the controlling authority. During pendency
of such proceedings, the deceased workman died.
4. Mr. Shaw submits that the controlling authority, subsequent
to the death of the deceased workman, did not take any steps
on the basis of the application filed by the deceased workman,
who is predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner no. 1. It is for
such reason, the petitioner no. 1 also could not file any
application, praying for substitution. It is submitted that the
proceedings on account of non-payment of gratuity payable to
the deceased workman is pending before the controlling
authority. He says that the petitioner no. 1 is entitled to the
gratuity payable to the deceased workman on the basis of
determination to be made by the controlling authority. He
says that the Controlling Authority has not taken any steps in
the matter. Unless this Court issues specific direction and
directs the controlling authority to dispose of the pending
application by granting liberty to the petitioner no. 1 to apply
before the controlling authority, the petitioner no.1 shall
suffer irreparable loss and injury.
5. Mr. Ghosh, learned advocate appearing for the respondent no.
3 submits that pursuant to a Court sale, initiated sometime in
the year 2001, the management of the respondent no. 3 has
changed and the deceased employee was never an employee of
the present management of the respondent no. 3. He,
however, does not question the authority of the Controlling
Authority to adjudicate the proceedings filed by the deceased
workman in "Form-N".
6. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties and having considered the materials on
record, I am of the view that no useful purpose will be served
by keeping the writ application pending.
7. In view thereof, I propose to and do hereby dispose of the
present writ application by directing the respondent no. 2 to
expeditiously dispose of the gratuity proceedings filed by the
deceased workman in Form-'N' forming annexure P-2 to the
present application, by permitting the petitioner no. 1 to apply
in such pending proceedings for being added as party to such
proceedings. The respondent no. 2 shall consider the
application to be filed by the petitioner no. 1 in accordance
with law without being influenced by any observations made
herein and shall hear out and dispose of the proceedings
pending before him as aforesaid, as expeditiously as possible
preferably within a period of three months from the date of
communication of this order upon giving reasonable
opportunity of hearing to the parties.
8. The writ application being WPA 27157 of 2022 is accordingly
disposed of.
9. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be
given to the parties on priority basis upon completion of
requisite formalities.
(Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)
sb
