63 ”Es an t‘a’an’’r 1&1 WW WN Wm are“; was (gamma) @mw W‘W 26.2.2007: Shri Ashok Swamkar counsel f< Dr. N.K. Shukla learned Sr. cc applicants. Repiy has been fiied by th( mentioned that the gratuity payab! ‘d‘ep‘osited with the Assistant Labour C / Competent Authoritv on 15.12200 claimrnd to be the Widow and son successron certrfrcate vrde Annexure Suceessron Case No. 30IZGO4 on 10. 9f Rs. 1.10.948 has been debosited W' vide Eemand Draft dated 15.12.2006. the apnticant herein on 26.12.2005 wz Class I Katghora, which was tater in tit disbursed and as such there is dispute have obtained the succession certifica Ganoa Bai is the nominee of late XE-HC 78 9/0? 26G x Winswi‘ffftséi%m érsifnaawa 1r the appiicant. >unsei with Miss. Ritu Mishra tor non- aa 3 respondents wherein it has been to late Baiiram Yadav has been ommissioner (Centre!) District Shahdoi 8. Smt. Ganga Bai and Kiran Kumar of late Ballrarn Yadav obtained the 1 from Civil Judge Class-l Umariya in 11.2005 and based on that an amount ith the Assistant Labour Commissioner The succession certificate obtained by s issued from the Court of Civil Judde ne. therefore the amount could not be i between the parties and both of them tes. Moreover. Dr. Shukla submits that Balirarr Yadav as is mentioned in paragraph 2 of the reply Thus in View of above there is dispute regarding ‘th entitlement of the applicant to receive the gratuity of late Baliram Yadav. tn these circumstances the applicant may approach approorlate forum for redressal of his drievance and no case of contemiot is made out xAccoidinglv the notices of contemot are discharded and the oetitlon Is i dismissed Sd/- L.C.BHADOO Judge i