1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. WRIT PETITION NO. 4222 OF 2010 Divisional Controller, MSRTC and another -: VERSUS :- Shesrao Hari Anandrao and others. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : OCTOBER 19, 2010. Heard Shri V.G. Wankhede, learned Counsel for petitioners, Shri P.N. Verma, learned Counsel for respondent no.1 and Shri Joshi, learned A.G.P. for respondent nos. 2 and 3. Challenge is to orders passed under Payment of Gratuity Act, directing petitioners to release amount of gratuity totaling to Rs. 1,93,493/-, in favour of respondent no.1. The amount was deposited by the petitioners while filing appeal under Section 7[7] of the Payment of Gratuity Act, and before the employer could approach this Court, the amount has been withdrawn by respondent no.1. Petitioners contend that amount of gratuity was adjusted towards loan recovery of respondent no.1. Respondent no.1 had borrowed loan from the Cooperative 2 Bank of employees and towards that repayment amount of Rs. 1,11,302/- was forwarded to the Bank. Shri Verma, learned Counsel has pointed out reply/affidavit. He states that petitioners have recalled the amount forwarded to Bank and Bank had accordingly returned that amount to petitioners. Bank has therefore issued letters to respondent no.1 on 18.01.2010, 01.06.2010 and 14.09.2010 calling upon him to clear the loan liability. According to him, the petitioners have not suffered any loss in the matter, and hence the amount of gratuity as deposited has been rightly allowed to be withdrawn by the employee. Learned A.G.P. appearing for respondent nos. 2 and 3 has supported the order. It is apparent that as the petitioners have adjusted /recalled the amount of gratuity forwarded by them to the Banker of respondent no.1 towards loan repayment, petitioners cannot seek exemption from paying the amount of gratuity to respondent no.1. The impugned orders therefore, call for no interference in present matter. Writ Petition is therefore rejected. No costs. JUDGE Rgd.