Uttarakhand High Court
College Of Engineering vs Appellate Authority And Others on 8 December, 2023
Author: Pankaj Purohit
Bench: Pankaj Purohit
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3377 of 2023
College of Engineering, Roorkee ........Petitioner
Versus
Appellate Authority and Others ........Respondents
With
Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3392 of 2023
College of Engineering, Roorkee ........Petitioner
Versus
Appellate Authority and Others ........Respondents
With
Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3401 of 2023
College of Engineering, Roorkee ........Petitioner
Versus
Appellate Authority and Others ........Respondents
With
Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3402 of 2023
College of Engineering, Roorkee ........Petitioner
Versus
Appellate Authority and Others ........Respondents
With
Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3403 of 2023
College of Engineering, Roorkee ........Petitioner
Versus
Appellate Authority and Others ........Respondents
With
Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3404 of 2023
College of Engineering, Roorkee ........Petitioner
Versus
Appellate Authority and Others ........Respondents
Present:-
Mr. Navneet Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioner-Institution in all
petitions.
2
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral)
Since all these writ petitions involve similar controversy,
therefore they are being heard and decided together. For the purpose of
brevity facts of Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3370 of 2023 is being taken up
for consideration of the controversy.
2. The petitioner, College of Engineering, has challenged the order
dated 01.07.2023 passed by the Controlling Authority under the
Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred as "Act of 1972")
as well as the judgement and order dated 19.06.2022 passed by the
Appellate Authority under the Act of 1972.
3. The contention of the petitioner is that earlier, the employees of
the college were not entitled to get the Gratuity, but, subsequently, by
virtue of the amendment incorporated in the year 2009 in the Payment
of Gratuity Act, 1972, the employees of the Institution of the petitioner
were made entitled for the gratuity. Consequently, the respondent-
employee made an application for payment of the gratuity.
Subsequently, when gratuity was not paid, an application was moved
by the respondent-employee to the Controlling Authority under the
Payment of Gratuity Act, and the Controlling Authority directed the
petitioner's college to make the Payment of Gratuity to the respondent-
employee calculating it on the gross-salary of the respondent-
employee and consequently, a sum of Rs. 7,31,068/- was calculated
and directed to be paid to the respondent-employee along with simple
interest at the rate of 10% per annum.
4. Although the payment has been made by the College, still the
college challenged the order passed by the Controlling Authority dated
29.09.2022 before the Appellate Authority and the Appellate Authority
clarified the position and held that the gratuity shall be calculated on
the basis of the basic salary, average grade pay and dearness allowance
and the matter was remanded. The Controlling Authority thereafter by
reason of order dated 01.07.2023, re-calculated the gratuity admissible
to the respondent-employee in the tune of the judgment and order
passed by the Appellate Court, which came to an amount of
Rs.6,66,452/- and has demanded a sum of Rs.1,18,666/- from the
petitioner Institution purportedly under the head of interest.
5. But the petitioner Institution being not satisfied with the
judgement passed by the Controlling Authority, has straightway
approached this Court challenging the said order alongwith the order
passed at the earlier instance by the Appellate Authority.
6. In the opinion of this Court, the petitioner-Institution does have
a right to challenge the order passed by the Controlling Authority
dated 01.07.2023 by filing an appeal to the Appellate Authority and
that statutory remedy provided under Section 18 of the Act of 1972
cannot be by-passed.
7. In the midst of the dictation, learned counsel for the petitioner
sought permission to withdraw the present writ petitions with liberty to
file a statutory appeal under Section 18 of the Payment of Gratuity Act
before the Appellate Authority.
8. The prayers so made is granted. The writ petitions are
accordingly dismissed as withdrawn. The petitioner-Institution is at
liberty to file statutory appeal under Section 18 of the Payment of
Gratuity Act, 1972.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to file such appeal
against the impugned judgement and order within a period of 15 days
from the date of the receipt of this order. Only
till then, no coercive measures shall be taken against the petitioner in
respect of payment of Gratuity or interest accrued thereon.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
08.12.2023
Ujjwal
