THANKAMMA Vs. REGIONAL JOINT LABOUR COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are the legal representatives of one Samuel Jose @ Jose Samuel, the licencee of Thankam Cashew Factory, Anayadi, Kunnathoor, Kollam who died on 22/2/2022. Additional respondent No.3 was a worker in the Thankam Cashew Factory, an establishment comes under the definition of 'factory' under Sec. 2(g) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 ('the Gratuity Act' for short). The worker superannuated on 30/10/2021. She filed an application before the employer under Sec. 7(1) of the Gratuity Act seeking payment of gratuity entitled to her. The employer refused to entertain the claim. Thereafter, she filed GC No.361/2022 under Sec. 7(4) of the Gratuity Act before the Controlling Authority. The 'respondent' in the application filed before the Controlling Authority was the Managing Director of Thankam Cashew Factory. Notice was issued to the respondent in the proceedings, which was received by one Sri. Anil Xavier, who was the then manager of the factory on 8/2/2023 (Ext.R3(a)). When the respondent in GC No.361 of 2022/the manager of the factory failed to appear before the Controlling Authority, Ext.P1 order was passed on 4/10/2023 directing payment of a sum of Rs.44,438.00 to the petitioner as gratuity with interest at the rate of 10% per annum. Revenue recovery proceedings were initiated against the factory. Thereafter, the petitioners filed Ext.P2 application to set aside the ex parte order before the Controlling Authority. It is submitted that the Authority did not consider that application. After that, the petitioners filed Ext.P4 appeal before the Appellate Authority along with an application to condone the delay of 472 days in filing the appeal. The Appellate Authority did not number the appeal. The petitioners also deposited the entire amount due to additional respondent No.3 as per Ext.P1 order, before the Controlling Authority. The petitioners seek a writ of mandamus directing respondent No.1 (the Appellate Authority) to number and admit the memorandum of appeal (Ext.P4).

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Senior Government Pleader and the learned counsel for additional respondent No.3.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioners raised the following grounds:-