THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR W.P.No. 1366 of 2004 Between: N.V.S.B.R.Sarma. ..... PETTIONER AND Hindustan Shipyard Limited, Visakhapatnam rep. By its Chairman and Managing Director and another. .....RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.1366 of 2004 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed by an employee of the Hindustan Shipyard Limited, Visakhapatnam, challenging the proceedings dated 31.10.2003 issued by the Chief Manager (Personnel and Administration) of the Shipyard informing the petitioner that, in view of the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him, it had been decided to withhold payment of his gratuity to the extent of the alleged loss of Rs.2.61 lakhs till the conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings. By an interim order dated 22.01.2004, this Court directed the respondent-Shipyard to pay the entire gratuity due to the petitioner as per his eligibility. Upon the vacate stay petition filed by the Shipyard, the said order was made absolute by an order dated 21.12.2004. It is stated that pursuant to the aforesaid orders of this Court, the petitioner has been paid the gratuity amount. However, it is his grievance that the said payment was made with some delay and, therefore, as per the mandatory provisions of Section 7(3)(a) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, he would be entitled to interest upon the belated payment. An application in W.P.M.P. No.11079 of 2005 has also been filed in this writ petition seeking a direction to the respondent-Shipyard to pay interest at the rate of 10% p.a. on the gratuity amount from 01.11.2003 to 28.03.2005. Upon an earnest consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the prayer in W.P.M.P.No.11079 of 2005 exceeds the prayer in the main writ petition. The prayer in the main writ petition is with regard to withholding of the petitioner’s gratuity pending completion of the disciplinary proceedings, as reflected by the impugned proceedings dated 31.10.2003. It is not in dispute that pursuant to the interim orders of this Court in this writ petition, the gratuity amount due to the petitioner upon his retirement on 31.10.2003 has been paid. The only dispute that survives is with regard to the entitlement of the petitioner for interest in respect of the alleged delay in the payment of the said gratuity. That issue cannot be made the subject matter for adjudication in this writ petition. It is always open to the petitioner to invoke such remedies as are available to him in law with regard to the payment of interest allegedly due to him on the gratuity amount. The writ petition therefore does not survive for consideration in so far as withholding of gratuity amount is concerned and it is accordingly closed. There shall be no order as to costs. SANJAY KUMAR,J Dt:03.09.2009 usd