Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 855 UK
Judgement Date : 10 July, 2025
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition No. 2027 of 2025 (M/S)
The Manager, Indira Rashtriya Chetna ........Petitioner
Versus
Shyam Lal Kansal ........Respondent
Present:-
Mr. Anil Kumar Joshi, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Vikas Pande,
Advocate for the petitioner.
JUDGMENT
Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)
The challenge in this petition is made to the order dated
30.06.2025, passed in Case No.PGA-02/2016, Shyam Lal Kansal Vs.
The Manager, Indira Rashtriya Chetna and Another, by the Controlling
Authority, under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 ("the Act")/Deputy
Labour Commissioner, Dehradun. By it, the petitioner has been
directed to deposit the amount of gratuity before the authority or else
proceedings for recovery under Section 8 of the Act shall be initiated.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order
has been passed under Section 7(4) of the Act; the petitioner does not
come within the purview of the Act and in case the petitioner prefers
an appeal, he has to make pre-deposit.
4. Section 7(7) of the Act makes provisions with regard to
appeal against the order impugned. It is a statutory alternate remedy,
which is definitely efficacious as well. Therefore, there is no reason to
make any interference in the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ
petition deserves to be dismissed at the stage of admission itself.
5. The writ petition is dismissed in limine.
(Ravindra Maithani, J) 10.07.2025 Ravi Bisht
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!