IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 768 OF 2010 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, EDC LTD AND ANR., ... Petitioners Versus THE CONTROLLING AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT.,1972, AND ORS., ... Respondents Mr. M. Sonak,advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Vivek Rodrigues,Additional Government Advocate for R.1. Coram:- A. P. LAVANDE, J. Date:- 18th August, 2011 P.C: 1. Heard Mr. Sonak, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Rodrigues,Additional Government Advocate for respondent no.1. None appears on behalf of respondent nos.2 and 3, though served. 2. By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner challenges order dated 22/6/2010 passed by the Respondent no.1 by which application dated 16/11/2006 filed by the petitioner for deletion as party opponent has been dismissed. Respondent no.3 filed an application under Section 7 of the Payment of Gratuity Act,1972 before respondent no.1 claiming gratuity from the petitioner and respondent no.2. The petitioner herein filed an application for deletion on the ground that the petitioner was neither a necessary nor proper party and as such, is liable to be dropped from the proceedings. The Respondent no.1 dismissed the application by order dated 22/6/2010. 3. Although several grounds have been urged in support of the petition, the petition is liable to be allowed on a short ground. 4. Record discloses that the petitioner herein urged several grounds in support of its plea that it is liable to be deleted as a party to the proceedings since it was neither a necessary nor proper party. The respondent no.1 by the impugned order has rejected the contentions of the petitioner. No reasons as required under the law have been given by the respondent no.1 nor all the contentions of the petitioner appear to have been dealt with by the respondent no.1. It is on this ground alone that the impugned order is liable to be quashed and set aside and is hereby quashed and set aside. 5. Respondent no.1 to decide the application dated 16/11/2006 afresh after giving an opportunity of being heard to the parties before it. Parties to appear before respondent no.1 on 21/9/2011 at 3p.m. Respondent no.1 shall dispose of the application on its own merits after considering all the contentions made by the parties. Needless to mention that I have not expressed any opinion on the rival claims and all the contentions of the parties are kept open. 6. The petition stands disposed of. A. P. LAVANDE, J. ap/-