Madras High Court
The Director vs The Joint Director Of Labour/ on 1 March, 2023
W.P.(MD)No.8062 of 2018
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED:01.03.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
W.P.(MD)No.8062 of 2018
W.M.P(MD).No.7648 of 2018
The Director,
Gandhigram Institute of Rural Health and
Family Welfare Trust,
Soundaram Nagar,
Gandhigram Post,
Dindigul District. ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Joint Director of Labour/
Appellate Authority under the
Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972,
Gajamalai Nagar,
Trichy.
2.The Assistant Commissioner of Labour/
Controlling Authority under the
Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972,
Nehruji Nagar 1st Street,
Dindigul.
3.F.Nirmal Kumar David ... Respondents
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.8062 of 2018
Prayer:Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari, call for the records of the second
respondent in P.G.No.21 of 2014 dated 21.07.2015 as confirmed on
appeal by the first respondent in P.G.Appeal No.20 of 2016 dated
20.11.2017 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Karthikeyan
for Mr.V.Vijay Shankar
For Respondents : Mr.S.P.Maharajan
Special Government Pleader
for R1 and R2
Mr.D.Shanmugaraja Sethupathi
for R3
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed to call for the records pertaining
to the order passed by the second respondent in P.G.No.21 of 2014 dated
21.07.2015 as confirmed on appeal by the first respondent in
P.G.Appeal No.20 of 2016 dated 20.11.2017 and quash the same.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.8062 of 2018
2. The case of the petitioner is that the third respondent joined in
the petitioner Trust on 06.06.1981 on consolidated pay and on
01.07.2004, he was appointed on regular basis under the Scheme of
Central Training Institute which was sponsored by the Ministry of Health
and Family Welfare, Government of India. He retired from service on
31.01.2014. He was paid gratuity for 9 ½ years of regular service.
Thereafter, he made an application before the second
respondent/Controlling Authority, claiming gratuity amount for the
period when he worked as temporary employee in the petitioner Trust.
However, the second respondent has passed an order directing the
petitioner Trust to pay a sum of Rs.1,97,408/- to the third respondent
along with interest at 10% per annum. Aggrieved by the same, the
petitioner Trust, after depositing the said amount before the second
respondent, has preferred an appeal before the first respondent/Appellate
Authority. However, the first respondent has confirmed the order passed
by the second respondent. Challenging the orders passed by the first and
second respondent, the present Writ Petition has been filed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.8062 of 2018
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit
that the third respondent was given gratuity for 9 ½ years of service
rendered by him. However, he has made an application before the second
respondent claiming gratuity amount for the period when he worked as
temporary employee in the petitioner Trust, without impleading the
Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India and Life
Insurance Corporation of India. As per the relevant Rules, he is not
entitled for gratuity amount for the temporary service rendered by him.
However, without considering the factual aspects, the second respondent
has passed an order directing the petitioner Trust to pay a sum of
Rs.1,97,408/- (Rupees One Lakh Ninety Seven Thousand Four Hundred
and Eight only) to the third respondent along with interest at 10% per
annum, as against which, the petitioner Trust preferred appeal before the
first respondent. The petitioner Trust raised all the legal issues including
lack of jurisdiction. But, the first respondent has confirmed the order of
the second respondent vide its order dated 20.11.2017.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.8062 of 2018
4. The learned counsel appearing for the third respondent would
submit that in a catena of judgments, this Court held that the seasonal
employee or non-provisional employee is entitled for gratuity amount
and the orders passed by the Controlling Authority and the Appellate
Authority cannot be interfered with by this Court. Since the present writ
petition is pending, the gratuity amount has not been disbursed to the
third respondent.
5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the
learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and
2 and the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent.
6. The facts in the present case are not in dispute. Admittedly, the
third respondent retired from service on 31.01.2014 and he made an
application claiming gratuity amount before the Controlling Authority,
against which, the petitioner Trust has also preferred an appeal before the
Appellate Authority. The Controlling Authority and the Appellate
Authority, after providing opportunity to the petitioner Trust and the third
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.8062 of 2018
respondent, has passed orders in favour of the third respondent. Further,
in the present case, no ground has been raised by the petitioner
warranting interference of the well-considered decision of the
Controlling Authority as well as the Appellate Authority. Hence, this
Court cannot re-appreciate the facts under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India and the prayer sought for in the present writ petition cannot be
granted.
7. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.
Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
01.03.2023
ssb
NCC:Yes/No
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
To
1.The Joint Director of Labour/
Appellate Authority under the
Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972,
Gajamalai Nagar,
Trichy.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.8062 of 2018
2.The Assistant Commissioner of Labour/
Controlling Authority under the
Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972,
Nehruji Nagar 1st Street,
Dindigul.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.8062 of 2018
M.DHANDAPANI,J.
ssb
W.P.(MD)No.8062 of 2018
01.03.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
