Gujarat High Court
Bhartiben Shivabhai Patel vs Appellate Authority Under The Payment ... on 22 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17473/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17473 of 2024
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
No
==========================================================
BHARTIBEN SHIVABHAI PATEL
Versus
APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT &
ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR P C CHAUDHARI(5770) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MS.SURBHI BHATI, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
MR KARMANYASINGH V RORE(10920) for the Respondent(s) No. 3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
Date : 22/04/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This petition is filed by the petitioner under Article 226
and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the
order passed in Gratuity Appeal No.183 of 2023 dated
18.07.2024 as well as the order passed by the learned
Controlling Authority in Gratuity Application No.286 of
2023 dated 28.11.2023 by which the learned Controlling
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17473/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/04/2025
undefined
Authority has rejected the claim made by the petitioner
on the ground that no affidavit is filed by the petitioner
supporting the contention made in the application.
2. Heard learned advocate Mr.P.C.Chaudhari for the
petitioner and learned advocate Mr.Karmanyasingh
Rore for the respondent No.3.
3. Learned advocate Mr.Chaudhari submits that the
petitioner was working as a Peon with the respondent-
Authority and on attaining the age of superannuation the
petitioner retired from the service on 31.01.2021. It is
the case of the petitioner before the learned Controlling
Authority as submitted by the learned advocate
Mr.Chaudhari that on completion of 240 days in every
year of service the claim was made before the learned
Controlling Authority by filing the form No."N" and "I".
Learned advocate Mr.Chaudhari submits that though in
support of the claim, the affidavit is also filed before the
learned Controlling Authority as well as the copy of the
passbook were also produced to substantiate the claim
made before the learned Controlling Authority, by
overlooking the said aspect the learned Controlling
Authority has dismissed the application filed by the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17473/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/04/2025
undefined
petitioner, on the ground that the petitioner fails to
establish the case by filing the affidavit. Learned
advocate Mr.Chaudhari submits that as learned
Controlling Authority did not consider the claim on
merits, the impugned order deserves to be set aside and
the Gratuity Application filed before the learned
Controlling Authority is required to be remanded back
for fresh decision.
4. As against the same the learned advocate Mr.Rore
submits that though the learned Controlling Authority
has rejected the application on the ground of non filing
of affidavit however, before the learned Appellate
Authority the petitioner fails to establish his continuous
service of 240 days by producing cogent evidence.
Learned advocate Mr.Rore submits that the pass book
which is produced before the learned Controlling
Authority does not suggest that continuity of service,
therefore, no error is committed by the learned
Controlling Authority as well as the learned Appellate
Authority, in rejecting the claim made by the petitioner.
Therefore, petition deserves to be dismissed and the
impugned order deserves to be upheld.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17473/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/04/2025
undefined
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
advocate for the respective parties and the reasons
assigned by both the Authorities, it emerges that learned
Controlling Authority in the order dated 28.11.2023 has
observed that in support of the claim of last drawn
salary of Rs.10,700/- as well as the retirement date on
31.01.2021 neither any documentary evidence, nor any
affidavit is filed. Learned Appellate Authority in the
order dated 18.07.2024 has observed that the petitioner
fails to establish his claim by producing the cogent and
convincing evidence, therefore, no error has been
committed by the learned Controlling Authority.
6. This Court has referred the affidavit which is filed before
the learned Controlling Authority which is a part of the
memo of the present petition at page No.30. In the said
affidavit, declaration is made by the petitioner that the
petitioner was serving as a Peon since 01.10.1992 and
has completed 28 years of service on 31.01.2021. It is
also declared by the petitioner that the last drawn wages
of the petitioner was Rs.10,700/- and has served 240
days in each calendar year. In support of the above
affidavit, the pay slip is produced before the learned
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17473/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/04/2025
undefined
Controlling Authority suggesting the last drawn basic
pay of Rs.10,700/- of December, 2020. In addition to that
a copy of the passbook is also produced to substantiate
the claim, however, it emerges that without examining
the above documents along with an affidavit, the learned
Controlling Authority has passed an order rejecting the
application by observing that neither any affidavit, nor
any documentary evidence was produced.
7. This Court is of the view that learned Appellate
Authority has also committed error in not examining the
above documents and upholding the order passed by the
learned Controlling Authority. In that background the
application preferred before the learned Controlling
Authority being No.286 of 2023 is required to be
decided up-fresh by the learned Controlling Authority.
8. Resultantly, this petition is allowed.
9. The matter is remanded back to the learned Controlling
Authority for deciding the Gratuity Application No.286 of
2023. The said exercise be completed within a period of
five months from the date of receipt of this order.
10. It is clarified that learned Controlling Authority shall
take decision after considering the contentions and the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17473/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/04/2025
undefined
submissions made by both the parties.
11. This Court has not opined anything on merits.
(M. K. THAKKER,J)
NIVYA A. NAIR
