R K GUPTA Vs. REGIONAL LABOUR COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner seeks, a) a writ of certiorari quashing the orders dated 18th August, 2002 and 16th September, 2002 of the respondents No.2 & 1 being the Authority and the Appellate Authority respectively under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, denying the claim of the petitioner for interest on gratuity already paid by the respondent No.3 M/s NBCC Ltd. and; b) a writ of mandamus directing the respondent No.3 to pay interest to the petitioner for the delayed payment of gratuity.

(2.) The petitioner was employed with the respondent No.3 since 28th January, 1963 and was since the year 1969 working as a Financial Advisor and Chief Accounts Officer. On 28th February, 1983 the petitioner sent a letter seeking voluntary retirement and also giving three months notice. The petitioner was informed that there was no scheme of voluntary retirement but the respondent No.3 agreed to relieve the petitioner of his duty on the petitioner paying for the balance notice period. The petitioner was also informed that proceedings for imposition of major penalty were then being contemplated against the petitioner. The petitioner filed CW No.450/1983 in this Court which was disposed of vide order dated 5th April, 1983 whereby the petitioner withdrew his letter seeking voluntary retirement and/or giving notice and the respondent No.3 accepted the petitioner back in service. However, on 8th April, 1983 the petitioner was suspended in view of contemplated disciplinary proceedings against him and pursuant to an inquiry, was on 11th February, 1985 dismissed from the services of the respondent No.3. The petitioner challenged the said dismissal by filing CW No.419/1985 in this Court which was allowed by a Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 20th February, 1998 and the order dated 11th February, 1985 of dismissal of the petitioner from service was set aside and the petitioner was held entitled to all the consequential benefits. However the petitioner having in the meanwhile on 30-04-1990 attained the age of superannuation, the respondent No.3 was directed to pay to the petitioner all the benefits to which he was entitled to as per the rules, as on the date of order of suspension i.e. 8th April, 1983 up to the date of superannuation within a period of three months from 20th February, 1998. The said judgment was not challenged by either party.

(3.) The petitioner on 22nd January, 2001 filed an application before the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act (Respondent No.2) seeking interest compounded annually @12% w.e.f. 1st May, 1982 to 8th June, 1998 and compounded annually at 24% thereafter up to the date of release of payment on delayed payment of gratuity. It may be noticed that the sum of Rs.1 lac had been released by the respondent No.3 to the petitioner towards gratuity, on 8th June, 1998 pursuant to the order dated 20th February, 1998 (supra) of this Court.