1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Writ Petition No. 1480/1997 Sub-Area Manager, W.C.L. ..vs.. Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) C.G.O. Complex, Nagpur and others -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or Court's or Judge's Orders directions and Registrar's orders. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Mehadia, Advocate for the petitioner. CORAM: A. B. CHAUDHARI, J. DATED : 12 th November, 2008 1. Heard Mr. Mehadia, learned counsel for the petitioner. The respondent-employee is absent. 2. By the present petition, the petitioner has challenged the orders made by the Controlling Authority awarding additional gratuity to the extent of Rs. 3288/- and confirmed in appeal by the Appellate Authority. 3. In support of the writ petition, Mr. Mehadia, learned counsel for the petitioner, argued that clause 9.1.4 of the National Coal Wage Agreement-III, in terms provide the mode of calculation of the gratuity in respect of the employees who have rendered services more than 30 years. According to him, the mode of calculation will be to consider 2 26 days in a month after completion of service of 30 years and not full 30 days as basis. According to Mr. Mehadia, the only reason furnished by the Controlling Authority as well as the Appellate Authority is that it would be against the interest of the workmen. He further submitted that though it is true that the amount is too small, the effect of the orders made by the Controlling Authority would be far reaching in the entire establishment of the petitioner and the other sister establishments. 4. I have gone through the impugned orders and also considered the submissions made by Mr. Mehadia, learned counsel for the petitioner. Considering the claim amount, I am not inclined to interfere with the orders, insofar as it awards additional gratuity of Rs. 3288/-. However, I make it clear that the orders impugned in this writ petition are restricted to the present matter only and shall not be utilised in any other matter for computation of the gratuity. Reserving this in favour of the petitioner, I dispose of this writ petition with no order as to costs. JUDGE kahale