IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 7TH JULY 2008 / 16TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 19090 of 2008(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ MOHANA CHANDRAN, S/O.PADMANABHAN NAIR, AGED 55 YEARS, PRASANTHI CASHEW FACTORY PUTHUSSERI BHAGOM, VAYALA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.MANU (PUNUKKONNOOR) SRI.P.SREEKUMAR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, REGIONAL LABOUR COMMISSIONER, KOLLAM. 2. CONTROLLING AUTHORITY, UNDER PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER, PATHANAMTHITTA. 3. KUNJAPPY T.D., THADATHILVEEDU, KADIKA, KAITHAPARAMBU, ENATHU. BY GOVT. PLEADER SHRI.I.V.PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No.19090 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 7th day of July, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioner was the employer in a Gratuity application before the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, in which the Controlling Authority passed Ext.P2 order directing the petitioner to pay gratuity to the tune of Rs.61,148/- to the 3rd respondent with interest as stated therein. That order was passed on 31.5.2005. But the same was an ex parte order. The petitioner filed appeal against Ext.P2 order before the Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act. The same was rejected on the ground that the petitioner had not deposited the amount of gratuity as required under the Act which is a condition for maintainability of the appeal. The petitioner had at that time paid only Rs.30,000/-. The petitioner filed this writ petition challenging the order of the Appellate Authority dismissing the petitioner's appeal for want of deposit of the gratuity amount. During the pendency of this writ petition, as suggested by this Court, the petitioner deposited the balance gratuity amount also. The petitioner now seeks a direction to the w.p.c.19090/08 2 1st respondent Appellate Authority to reconsider the appeal on merits. 2. In the nature of the order I propose to pass and especially to avoid a protracted litigation before this Court, which the 3rd respondent can ill-afford, I am inclined to dispose of this writ petition without issuing notice to the 3rd respondent, now that the petitioner has already deposited the entire amount of gratuity but without interest. Accordingly, Ext.P5 order is quashed and the 1st respondent is directed to consider the appeal after considering whether there the petitioner has shown sufficient reasons to condone the delay in filing the appeal. It would be open to the petitioner to file a petition for stay of disbursal of the amount now deposited, which shall also be considered on merits. However, if any amount has already been disbursed to the 3rd respondent, the same shall not be recovered pending disposal of the appeal. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge w.p.c.19090/08 3