Madras High Court
The Superintending Engineer vs The Appellate Authority Under The ... on 6 April, 2022
W.P.(MD)No.14680 of 2019
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED:06.04.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.(MD)No.14680 of 2019
&
WMP(MD)No.11117 of 2019
The Superintending Engineer,
Theni Electricity Distribution Circle,
Tamil Nadu Electricity Generation and Distribution
Corporation Ltd.,
Theni-625 531. ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Appellate Authority under the payment
of Gratuity Act,
Tiruchirappalli -20.
2. The Assistant Labour Commissioner,
(Controlling Authority under the payment
of Gratuity Act)
Dindigul.
3. R.Sekaran ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to
issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the 1st respondent in
P.G.Appeal No.127 of 2017 and quash the order dated 14/07/2018
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.14680 of 2019
confirming the order of the 2nd respondent in G.A.No.155/2016 dated
30/11/2016 .
For Petitioner : Mr.T.S.Gopalan and Co
For R1 and R2 : Mr.A.K.Manikkam
Special Government Pleader
For R3 : No appearance
ORDER
The writ on hand is filed to quash the order dated 14.07.2018
passed in P.G.Appeal No.127 of 2017.
2.The writ petition is filed by the Superintending Engineer, mainly
on the ground that the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act is not
applicable for the employees of the Establishment.
3.It is contended that the first respondent had erroneously
proceeded with the matter without deciding the preliminary issue
regarding the maintainability of the petition under the provisions of the
Gratuity Act. The applicability of the provisions of the Act was
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.14680 of 2019
considered by this Court in W.P.No.32774 of 2018 dated 13.09.2019 and
it is found that the writ petitioner Board was exempted in respect of the
employees working in the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board. In view of the
exemption already granted and further, the payment of gratuity regulated
with reference to the rules in force in the Board, the first respondent has
committed an error in entertaining the petition under the General Act.
The relevant paragraph of the judgment is extracted hereunder:
“2.The petitioner claims that he joined as a Contract
Labourer on 02.08.1989, in the post of Helper. He was
directly employed under 4th respondent, Salem and
pursuant to the report of Justice Khalid Committee, he was
permanently absorbed in the Tamil Nadu Generation and
Distribution Corporation Limited on 01.05.1999.
Admittedly, the writ petitioner is now brought under the
regular establishment under the Pensionable Services.
Thus, the service conditions as applicable to the regular
employees of the Board would be applicable to the writ
petitioner also. The writ petitioner attained the age of
superannuation and as per the Service Rules in force the
terminal and pensionary benefits were settled in favour of
the writ petitioner including the gratuity. Not satisfied with
the payment of terminal and pensionary benefits, as per the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.14680 of 2019
Service Rules applicable to the Tamil Nadu Electricity
Board, the petitioner filed a petition before the Controlling
Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972
claiming the balance gratuity amount. The Controlling
Authority allowed the claim of the writ petitioner and
directed the Electricity Board to pay balance gratuity
amount by calculating under the Payment of Gratuity Act,
1972. The appeal was filed by the Electricity Board and the
Appellate Authority reversed the order and rejected the
petition filed by the writ petitioner under the Payment of
Gratuity Act on the ground that the Act itself was exempted
in respect of the employees working in the Tamil Nadu
Electricity Board under the Pensionable Services and
therefore, no petition can be entertained under the
provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.”
4. In view of the fact that the writ petitioner Electricity Board is
exempted from the provisions of the Gratuity Act and the order impugned
is perverse and untenable. Thus, the order of the first respondent dated
dated 14.07.2018 passed in P.G.Appeal No.127 of 2017 is quashed and
the writ petition stands allowed. The amount deposited by the writ
petitioner with the first respondent is directed to be returned within a
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.14680 of 2019
period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petition is closed.
06.04.2022
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
Ns
To
1. The Appellate Authority under the payment
of Gratuity Act,
Tiruchirappalli -20.
2. The Assistant Labour Commissioner,
(Controlling Authority under the payment
of Gratuity Act)
Dindigul.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.14680 of 2019
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.
Ns
W.P.(MD)No.14680 of 2019
&
WMP(MD)No.11117 of 2019
06.04.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
