IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP. No. 16457 of 1989 Date of Decision: 17.12.2010. Smt. Kishni Devi & others --Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and another --Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI. Present:- None for the petitioners. Mr. R.D. Sharma, D.A.G., Haryana. Mr. Sanjay S. Chauhan, Advocate for respondent no.2. *** PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL) The husbands of the petitioners were working as Sweepers and Jamadar in the respondent-municipality. It is alleged that they served for a period ranging between 10 to 15 years as Class-IV employees till the time of their death. It is stated that the husbands of the petitioners died on 11.2.1981, 23.10.1978 and 9.9.1978 respectively. The petitioners are claiming the gratuity for the period of service rendered by their late husbands. The State issued instructions dated 12/15.9.1986 whereby the municipal employees who retired on or after 23.1.1982 were granted the benefit of gratuity. The petitioners also claim the benefit in view of the judgement of this Court reported as 1985 (1) P.L.R 513 titled as Chaman Lal Vs. Municipal Committee, Panipat and a Division Bench judgement of this Court passed in CWP No.427 of 1987 titled as Kundan Lal Narang Vs. The State of Haryana etc. decided on 25.8.1987. Section 4 of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 provides for payment of gratuity to an employee on termination of his employment or on CWP. No. 16457 of 1989 -2- his retirement or death or disablement etc., where the employee has completed more than 5 years of continuous service. Municipal Committee cannot be excluded from the application of the Act being an establishment as defined under the Act. The municipality in its reply disputed the claim of the petitioners on the ground that the deceased employees expired prior to 23.1.1982 and thus under the Govt. Notification they are not entitled to gratuity. It is further disputed that the case is covered by a Division Bench judgement of this Court, referred to above. Heard learned counsel for the parties. From the reading of Section 4, it is abundantly clear that the employees working in establishments are entitled to gratuity under the provisions of the Gratuity Act. Application of Payment of Gratuity Act is not in question. Govt. Notification further strengthens this view. In this view of the matter, this petition is allowed. Respondent- municipality is directed to pay the gratuity to the petitioners in accordance with the provisions of Section 4 of the Gratuity Act along with the statutory interest as prescribed under the Act within a period of three months, failing which the petitioners shall be entitled to 3% more than the statutory interest prescribed under the rules till the amount is actually paid. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 17.12.2010. lucky