HARRISONS MALAYAM LTD Vs. BALAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Almost identical contentions have been raised in these writ petitions. They involve a common question as to whether an employer has the right to forfeit the gratuity payable to an employee under the Payment of Gratuity Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') either in whole or in part. I will refer to the facts in WP.(C). 17700/2009 and disposal of the same would govern the other writ petitions also.

(2.) 1st respondent filed an application before the Controlling Authority under the Act. He contended that he joined services of the petitioner on 1.5.1968 and retired from service on 1.9.2005. He had put in 38 years of service and claimed an amount of Rs. 76,730/- towards gratuity.

(3.) The Management in its counter statement inter alia contended that the claimant is in possession of 50 cents of land, which was allotted to him for the purpose of cultivation. He has not handed over the land to the petitioner even after retirement and that the Company has sustained a loss of Rs. 1 Lakhs on account of the said action by the claimant. The Management also raised a contention that there was delay on the part of the workman in approaching the Controlling Authority under the Act By Ext. P1 order, the Controlling Authority, after condoning the delay in preferring the application, determined the gratuity payable at Rs. 66,536/- and directed the Management to pay the sum together with simple interest at 10% with effect from 1.10.2005. The order was affirmed by the appellate authority and these orders by the Controlling Authority and the appellate authority under the Act have been challenged in these writ petitions.