IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRuT PETITION No. 33? OF 2005 / PETITIONER I“ : The Hingustan SteeIWorks Construhtions Lfd through : Group General Manager, Bhilai, District : Durg ( C G ) VERSUS REsPONDENTs ‘ / /: 1. Shri Suresh KumarChetal,S/o. late Shri LR. Chetai, F-1, Pankaj Vikram Complex, Rajender Nagar, Raipur 492 008. v 2. The Assistant Labour Commissioner, ( Centrai ) Controlling Authority under Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 Raipur, Chhattisgarh. The Appellate Authority under payment of Gratuity Act, R.L.C. ( C ), Civil Centre, Maratal, Jabalpur. (M.P.) %%§Q%% {:aawRT 9%: C§’§%§;§§'?§$&&£§~=§ AT Eiiémwa {Hean. Mr. Ju$€§ae Pri‘iinker Eiwakei} Wé’éi Pairiiésm Ma. $3? Q? 2§@§ ' $h?i P. S, mshy, counae! farms: petéiianxer Sm Wransira Sharma course} fer the reSpondents. W§§§T P£?§’§'§Q§x§ UNQER @RWSLE ?2$i2£? OF ?§‘§§E §$N$'§"3?i§T%QN Q?‘ Wmifa QRagR i 2wa2m§§ Cha%éersge m ism presan? wyét Etietiiien §$ i9 iiw order da‘zea‘ 263.4;.2GE35 (Amaxwe P4) passeé by respcnden‘e Na2 céé¥ea§§ng ts e pati'imner te :say i‘he err-kéra ammmt aaf graiuii’y i‘a rewanéwt Nan? abmg W§§h compaund miewgt @ 15% in visw sf tha Paavégmm‘a a? Syec‘imn 8 af Paymernt af Gratuity Act, €9?2 {hereinaféer mi‘e‘rred ‘m aa ‘Aai‘ of 1972’). We pe$§%§mer haa aka} shai§anged ihe Gzéa¥ daied 2?.mQGQ4- {Annexum PA} pasased by $55 i—‘xppegate Auihor'3iy (mgpcndem No.3} £é§smisaing i'he aweai a3 maferred in: respamem N53? hm g§v§ng éiberiy €0 hi! fa? apprcaching m :he Car‘itm‘xing Amheri‘ky far any 1&33 payment a? gm’zuiiy and 3‘03” itg mmvery 2‘ Eme§ fads a E2 e ca$e are that raspmadgnt Mm was aa ermiayw m the eswbEshmeni of ’the gei§t€£m€r and a é‘na time cf ref§§emem hzE W3$ Warkmg as, senior manag$5i Ha iwk {e’ziremen‘i‘ \\_.> frsm Ehe patéimntaz’3 Estab§§$hmeni undar i'ne: Vaiumary Rakkamerii Schgme wef. 315.199? Accommg t0 éhe getétiswar, afé’w raiiremem the resmnaeni NM was en%%?ied fm the grawgy amoam sf Rs €,OG‘,BGO bui as: the peim‘mer was facing acute §inanc§a! cris§3 me same mwd no% be gem i9 “we reslaondent NM émm<ad§a$9éy Tm rawansiem NM filed a ca$e have the cgmgaieni aumarity {mapmden’é M32) which wgs ragiaiared as w$e NQRP— 48{?36)/2GDO an 25‘092GGQ videe Annexure P—Z and ”km? ssaid J ‘%_‘L;u ‘3ET?§$V§R The Himdas‘tan Sieef Works VER$HS Cans€ruci§ons Ltd. §E$§QNEE§T$ Sum$h Kumar Chaia: and 9%?3%rs W2; compei‘ent auiharhy passed an arder awarding Rs.1,00,$00 Mia simme inieres’t @éQQ/a in h§s favcur. Despite this Order havmg been passed an 25092GGD' the Graiu§ty amsunt cauid not be paid t0 rseswndem NM and “area-”+er ma RRC was issued‘by the Tah$%ldar, Durg 0n 18.7.2601 far recevery 0f the amouai a? R$.1,4Q,GGG. Howevar ‘ihe paymem was mt made by ihe peti‘tionar immeidéa?eiy after fine issuance a? RRC, it was made on 25.92%2 in faveur a? ihe respondant NM. Subsequeniiy, an 30‘122063 respendeni Mai filed an apgaeai umj$r Sectien 7 9f Payment of Graiuity As'i, i972 bafore the Agpeiiate Auihoa'ity (iespendeni No.3} which waé dismissed er ’?7 Di 9004 vicie Annexure P é an me Vauad 0f miay Him/aver a'a abserva‘iion wa$ maae by 1* tha‘ “i‘1e appeiian‘ may mwvevei appmdch whimiimg Authenty iar any less payment ef gre‘iuiiy and fer iie recevery eic.” Pursuant {e this abeei’vaiien 3i the Aepe'iaie Auther'iy, en 26133 2004 an appiicaiien We“ fi by responeem Ne i beie e tee Cent oi mg Auiharity (ALP‘ and we; hearing ine pauses on 2&912065 vde Annexuie P-i ine order impugned has been passed by ii: directing the petiiionei’ is pay the graiuiiy amount aieng wiin compeund interest @ 15 %. 3. Counsei for ine peiiiiener submiis that firsiiy there was en inerdineis deiay in fiiing he aspeai by respendené No.1 and once ins Appeiiaie Auincrity eismisssd the said appeai ihem was nc eccesicn fer ihs Acneiiaie Auiher y to again wake any such abeerva ion givmg iibenty ic iespcndeni N01 fer approaching me Conirciiing Aciincnty To; en}: iess payment. He mine! submiie inei ‘ihe respendent No.1 cennei‘ take the benefit ei ine Act of 1972 becaiise immediaieiy‘afier issuance 0i RRC ine entire paymen? was mezje o the reependent Net‘i on 25.9.2GG2. He further submits that enee the enter dated 259.2G00 (Annexure P—2} was cenfiimed by the Appeiiate Authetity on 27.01.2934 vide Annexure P-4, the passing ef the impugned orcier dated 28cm .2005 (Annexute P—i) is in feet, {eviewing its own weer and the same is not permissibie under the iewi ‘ Prexiisiens of the Act at 1W2 is no? at‘racted ts the preseni case became RRC Issued on i803? 20M was aireadyxrrrr, henaured on 95 9 2002 RAA ,3” 4‘ On {he ether ham apposmg the avermants made by tha Gimme! for ithe petitmner it has bash argued by the mums! far respmdenig Ehai the oydem imgugned are stricth; in accordance with zaw E as pmsant iS a ca$e whare fe$pondent NM has been demed legitimate dues fer m3 fauit on hie pert and was not paid a penny towards his gratuity tiii 25.09.2002. 5‘ Heard cemnee! fer ihe parties and eerused the materiai avaiiabie on recerd. Uediepuiediy, ihere ie an inordinate delay on the part of the petitioner te make the paymeni e? gratuity Section 8 of the Act 0f 1972 reads as undei’: 6‘ 8. Recovery of grateii‘y — if the emwm‘ of gratuity payabfe under this Act is not pei‘aj ey five empioyea within the pfescfibed z‘ime, fa the person enz‘itleo‘ i‘herez‘o, fhe conii'oliing aefhorify 33731;. or? an appiicaiion made fo it ii? z‘eis beeai’f by the aggrieved person, issue, a cen‘ificate for fhai‘ amount fo the Coiiecfor who shelf recover the some, a‘ogez‘her with eompouod ioterest ihereon fer each rate es z‘he Cem‘rai Governmenf may, by noz‘ificafion} speciii/J, from €he defe of expia/ of me prescobed fime as arrears offend revenue and pay fhe same $0 i‘he persor; eoiiz‘led thereto: i IProvided five: me eontroiiing atrrhorii‘y Sheri, before isszrmg a certificate Lmder this“ eeefion, give fee emproyer e reesoivebi‘e opporifoniz‘y of soowing cause against the isso‘e ofeeoh seeificefe: Provie'ee’ furfher fhaf the amoum of ioferesf payable under z‘his secfjon Sheri, in oo case exceed the emoamr of gratuiz‘y peyebie woofer ihie Aotj i Concieo’: of the peiiiioner reiieoie that reseondeni No.1 retired on 3‘i.5o19927 one? he wee eniitied for ihe fuii gratuity amouo‘t of Re.i,QO,GOD by 30.06.1997 instead of making the payment of the same on the ground of aiiegeci financial crisis the payment was withheid and the respondeni No.1 was compeiied to approach the oompe’rent auihoriiy by fiiing the case and the said competent auihorii‘y passed an order in his favour on 25.09.2000 vide Annexure P-2 directing the petitioner to oay the amount of gratuity with @ 10% eimpie intereei. Even thereafter when the petitioner did not make ' gem %/ *u, payment and kept quiet, ultimateiy fna RRC was issued Vida Annexure P-3 but the pemisner agam did not make the payment immediately to respendent No.1 and ult§mateiy after more than ene year the RRC was honoured on 25.09‘2D02. Thus, for about We years, the respondent No.1 was denied his tegitimate ciaim for no fatiit on his part Under the compelting circumstances, he ptefetred an appeai before the appeiiate authority. Though the said appeal was dismissed by the appeiiate authority, iiberty was given to the respondent No.1 to approach the conttoiiing authority again for any less payment of gratuity and for its recovery etc. Taking the benefit ot' this observation, the respondent No.1 again approached the Controtiing Authority and thereafter the Controiiing Authority passed the order granting @ 15% compound interest in fayour of the respondent No.1 considering the provisions of the Act of t972. 7. i find no force in the argument of the oounset tor the petitioner thatthe provisions of the Act of 19?2 wouid not come into play after RRC being honoured by the petitioner on 25.09.2002. This act of the petitioner in not paying the amount of gratuity within time was its own act and for that the respondent no.1 cannot be made to suffer. The petitioner was obliged to make the payment of gratuity in favour of respondent No.1 immediateiy after granting VRS to the respondent No.1 but the petitioner had unnecessarily taken time for making the said payment tiil 25.99.2aa2. The action not to pay gratuity was one of the petitioner’s making and it was an issue which failed. Thus, any action which the petitioner may have brought, and it proved unsuccessfui. ought not to be at the disadvantage or inconvenience of the employee so as to render the intention and purpose of the Act; aforesaid, redundant. For deiayed payment, in reference to the context, the empioyee is entitied to receive gratuity together with compound interest thereon at the rate of 15% per annum. For the purposes of this Act shouid an employer iay an action to stait the payment of gratuity and the action, uttimateiy taiis, the employee is not to suffer on the hazards of iitigation. ' »r. , r‘ S" 8. Thus, effect has to be given m Section 8 of ‘ihe Act, in its simpiicity. When an emphyee becomes animed to receive gratuity and gratuity is nOt paid by the empioyer then ‘ihe intentiae of the enactment ie that it must be paid to the empmyee with cempeund interest at the fate 0f 15% per annum. it was not intended ie Snveive an employee in a complicated caicutation 0f interest which may have accrtged at the back for the pertod of an interim Greer during which gratuity was not paid to the empioyee‘ A5 far as the empieyee is coneemed it is deiayed payment. Thue, an employee must receive the ameunt in accordance with the intention as expressed in Section 8‘ in e9 far as the empieyee is cencerned the enaetment must take its ceui'ee in its simpiicity that the payment of gratuity which has been stipuiated and detetmined must be deiivered with interest a stipulated in Section 8 of the Act atoresaid.‘ 9. Thus, the order impugned directing the petitioner to pay the amount of giratuity to respondent Not being in eonsonanoe with the > provision ot Section 8 of the Payment of Gratuity Act is juet and proper and does not suffer from any iiiegaiity. Aocordingty, the petition does not invoiye any merit and being so it is iiabie to be dismissed. Let it be recorded as such. Neediess to say that the petitioner wouid pay the said amount of‘gratuity along with compound interest @ 15% as per order of the appeiiate authority. Sdl— Pritinker Diwaker " Judge e