INTHE HIGH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRITPETITIONVUNO. ~~7 2-<3 OF2007. • PETlTIONER(^f M/s. K.N. OIL INDUSTRIES LTD., Through : Its Director, Mahasamund (C.G.). VERSUS RESPONDENT(S) y^ :^^^ ^-••^y' vy^^'^ \1..\-' ^'",'>/:^'^\v'"" • sf' •srf*"' ^1. Ramnafh Sahu S/o Shri Khorbahara, Daldali Road, Ward No.6. ^ Mahasamund (C.G.). 2. The Controlling Authority, Payment of Gratuity Act, Office of the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Raipur(C.G.). ^- 3. The Appellate Authority, Payment of Gratuity Act, Office ofthe Deputy Commissioner, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.). WRITPEtlTION UNDERARTICLE2^6, READWITH ARTICLE 227 OFTHE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (Hon. Mr. Justice Pritinker Diwaker) Writ Petition (L) No. 720Sof 2007 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS VERSUS M/s K.N. Oil Industries Ltd. through its Director Ramnath Sahu and others Writj'etLtion (U No. 7532 of 2007 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS VERSUS M/sK-N. Oil Industries Ltd. through its Director Mohan Majhi and others WritPetition (L) No. 7533 of 2007 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS VERSUS M/s K.N. Oil Industries Ltd. through its Director Girdharilal Sahu and others Shri P.S. Koshy counsel for the petitioner. Shri Anup Majumdar, counsel for respondent No.1 WRIT PETITIONS UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA O RD E R (28.09.2011) As all the aforesaid petitions, three in nuriiber, arise out of the same order dated 14.11.2007 passed by respondent No.3 herein in Case Nos. 18 PGA/2006, 26PGA/2006 and 22 PGA/2006 respectively and that the point involved therein is also one and the same, they are disposed of by this common order. 2. The order impugned dated 14.11.2007 has been passed by the appellateauthority i.e. Deputy Labour Commissioner, Raipur (respondent fl ss:A"wa?'^8^K -^i 1 s! *».... -^ '^;.^ ; .^" '/ •2— No.3 in all the three petitions) under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 arising out of the order of the Controlling Authority i.e. Assistant Labour Commissioner, Raipur in Case No. 115/PGA/2004, 123/PGA/2004 and 119/PGA/2004 respectively. 3. Facts of the case in brief are that certain amount towards gratuity was given to respondentNo.1 in each ofthese cases on their termination from service from the petitfoner's establishment. The amount of gratuity given to the private respondents was deposited by them and a claim was raised before the Controlling Authority (respondent No.2 herein) under the Payment of Gratuity Act i.e. Assistant Labour Commissioner, Raipur and three ex parte awards were made against the petitioner on 3.8.2005. In appeal before the appellate authority (Deputy Labour Commissioner, Raipur), an objection was raised by the petitioner that as per the definition given in Section 2 (a) sub clause (b) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1 972 appropriate government in respect of the petitioner would be the Central Government having branches in more than one State. 4. Counsel for the petitioner submits that while passing the order impugned the appellate authority has not considered this important legal issue and bypassing the same it has passed the order impugned on merit. He submits that the preliminary objection raised by the petitioner goes to the root of the matter and the appellate authority was obliged to decide the same first. According to the counsel for the petitioner, the matter may be remitted back to the appellate authority for deciding the legal issue involved therein and proceed further. 5. Counsel for the respondent No.1 supports the order impugned and submits that the appellate authority was not obliged to decide the preliminary legal objection raised by the petitioner. 6. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 7. From the documents on record it is apparent that before the appellate authority an objection was raised by the petitioner with respect to the authority of the State Government for deciding the matter pertaining to ^ the Paymentof Gratuity but while passing the order impugned the same has not been touched by the appellate authority. The objection raised by the petitioner goes to the root of the matter and if the same is decided in its favour, it will have the effect over the order passed by the controtling authority. Considering tbe facts and circumstances of the case, the order impugned dated 18.11.2007 is hereby set aside. Matter is remanded back to the appellate authority (respondent No.3 herein) for deciding the appeat afresh including the preliminary objection raised by the petitioner, after giving due opportunityto the parties. If required, parties would be permitted to lead evidence. Needless to say that the amount already deposited before the appellate authority would not be disbursed till the appeal is decided. Both the parties, as agreed by them, shall appear before the appellate authority on 3.11.2011. Q. Petition disposed of. Sd/- PritinkerDiwakar