Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Dayaben Prabhulal Patel on 4 November, 2025
Author: Sunita Agarwal
Bench: Sunita Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/296/2018 ORDER DATED: 04/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 296 of 2018
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4607 of 2014
=============================================
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
Versus
DAYABEN PRABHULAL PATEL & ANR.
=============================================
Appearance:
MR SANJAY UDHWANI, AGP for the Appellant(s)
RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE
SUNITA AGARWAL
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.N.RAY
Date : 04/11/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)
1. Having heard Mr. Sanjay Udhwani, learned Assistant
Government Pleader for the appellants and perused the
record, pertinent is to note that the dispute adjudicated
by the learned Single Judge in the judgment impugned is
about the payment of interest for the delay in making the
payment of differential amount of gratuity.
2. It is to be noted that the petitioner had retired from
service in the month of June 2011 and was paid gratuity
to the tune of Rs.3,50,000/- as on 04.11.2011. It is noted
by the learned Single Judge that indisputably, the
petitioner was member of Contributory Provident Fund
(CPF) and she was not member of General Provident
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/296/2018 ORDER DATED: 04/11/2025
undefined
Fund (GPF) and her claim was governed by the
provisions of Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.
3. The finding returned by the learned Single Judge that
upper limit for gratuity was revised/increased to
Rs.10,00,000/- in the year 2010 before the petitioner
retired from service in June 2011, could not be assailed
before us. It is sought to be submitted by Mr. Sanjay
Udhwani, learned Assistant Government Pleader
appearing for the State appellants that the enhanced
gratuity to teachers working in non-government unaided
institutions, was implemented by the Government
Resolution dated 19.07.2014. The submission, thus, is
that the petitioner cannot be held entitled to interest as
awarded by the learned Single Judge prior to the date of
the Government Resolution dated 19.07.2014.
4. The fact remains that the petitioner is covered by the
provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, which
stood amended by Amendment Act of 2010 whereunder
the gratuity amount was increased from 3,50,000/- to Rs.
10,00,000/-. With the amendment in the provisions of
Payment of Gratuity Act, which came into effect on
24.05.2010, the petitioner was entitled to higher
amount of gratuity, which was not paid to her, after her
retirement in the month of June 2011. For the short
payment made towards gratuity inspite of the
amendment brought in the Payment of Gratuity Act,
1972 by virtue of the Amendment Act of 2010, the
petitioner is held entitled to interest with effect from
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/296/2018 ORDER DATED: 04/11/2025
undefined
04.11.2011 (when the amount of Rs. 3,50,000/- only was
paid to her) till the date when the balance amount of Rs.
6,50,000/- was paid, i.e. till 16.03.2015. This is the
direction issued by the learned Single Judge in the
judgment impugned, which we do not find to suffer any
error of law.
5. The arguments made by the learned Assistant
Government Pleader that the higher amount of gratuity
was payable to the petitioner only after the Government
Resolution dated 19.07.2014 was issued by the State
Government, is wholly misconceived. The fact that the
State Government has delayed in implementation of the
Amendment Act of 2010 with respect to the employees of
non-government grant-in-aid or unaided institutions will
not be a reason to deny the benefits to the petitioner.
The interest amount shall be calculated and paid to the
petitioner within a period of four weeks from today.
6. With the above directions, the appeal stands dismissed
being devoid of merits. No order as to costs.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ )
(D.N.RAY,J)
BIJOY B. PILLAI
