RAMDIYAL YADAV Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the issues involved in the aforesaid writ petitions are identical; therefore, they are heard anologous and are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) The brief facts relevant for adjudication of the Writ Petitions are that petitioners were working as a Gangman in the Public Works Department, they retired after attaining the age of superannuation as gangman in Public Works Department. Petitioner Guharam Sahu worked as gangman for more than 45 years and 9 months and petitioner Ramdiyal Yadav worked for more than 36 years and 9 months in the Public Works Department. The Joint Director, Treasury Accounts and Pension, Bilaspur had issued pension payment order on 18/11/2015 for petitioner namely Guharam Sahu for releasing gratuity to the tune of Rs.1,58,794..00 According to the petitioners, Guharam Sahu was entitled to receive Rs.2,83,230.00 but Rs.1,58,794.00 was paid which is less payment. Ramdiyal Yadav was entitled to receive Rs.1,85,903.00 but he was paid to Rs.1,50,082.00 as Gratuity.

(3.) Being aggrieved with less payment of gratuity by the respondent, petitioners have filed an application under Rule 10 sub Rule (1) of payment of Gratuity Act 1972 before the Controlling Authority/ Assistant Labour Commissioner, Bilaspur but the said authority has refused to entertain the same on the count that he has no jurisdiction to entertain the application filed by the government servant for grant of gratuity.