VPH IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION No. 293 OF 2008 IN WRIT PETITION No. 792 OF 2008 Ram Lal Garg Petitioner Vs. K. Subbaraman & Ors. Respondents Mr. V. P. Patil, for the Petitioner. Ms. Arti Anchan i/b. M.V. Kini for the Respondent. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO, & A. A. KUMBHAKONI, J. DATE : OCTOBER 14, 2008. PC :- 1. The learned counsel Mr. V. P. patil holding for S. K. Shinde seeks adjournment. We are not inclined to grant adjournment. 2. By this Notice of motion, the petitioner has prayed that he be paid his terminal benefits. On behalf of the respondent Management, learned counsel makes statement that in so far as the petitioner’s contribution to provident fund is concerned, that has been paid. In so far as employer’s provident fund contribution is concerned, that has been adjusted against the dues, pursuant to the order passed by the - 2 - Estate officer. In so far as the gratuity is concerned, it is pointed out that the Forfeiture Committee in respect of the Gratuity Claim, has by its order dated 9th September, 2008, approved the forfeiture of the gratuity payable to the petitioner. Considering that the petitioner has been dismissed from the service, after departmental inquiry, he is not entitled to any such gratuity. 3. On behalf of the petitioner, the learned counsel submits that the Estate officer has charged damages disproportionately. Even if that is the case, that is not the subject matter, which can be gone into by this Court and appeal against that order has already been preferred by the workman petitioner. 4. In so far as prayer Clause (b) is concerned, it is not possible to grant the said relief. 5. Considering the above, in our opinion nothing further survives in the motion. If any grievance still survives, the same can be considered at the time of final hearing of the petition. 6. In view of above, the Notice of Motion is dismissed. - 3 - Sd/- Sd/- [ A. A. KUMBHAKONI, J.] [ F.I. REBELLO, J.]