MANAGEMENT SRINIVAS FIRE WORKS Vs. APPELLATE AUTHORITY, UNDER PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, JOINT COMMISSIONER OF LABOUR AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Karthikeyan, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. S.C. Herold Singh, learned Government Advocate, who takes notice for R1 and R2 and the third Respondent not having been served.

(2.) The Petitioner, who is a management, is manufacturing fire works at Sivakasi. The Writ petition is filed against the order passed by the 2nd Respondent, Controlling Authority in P.G. No. 45 of 2003 dated 02.11.2004 and confirmed by the first Respondent, Appellate Authority in P.G.A. No. 50 of 2005 dated 29.12.2006. The third Respondent, who was employed by the Petitioner management, claimed gratuity for having worked for 13 years in their establishment. When the gratuity was not paid, she sent a legal notice. The Petitioner Management sent a reply dated 08.06.2002 stating that she had stopped on her own and therefore, they need not pay pay and reply for other allegations in the notice.

(3.) Thereafter, the 3rd Respondent has filed a gratuity application before the 2nd Respondent and the same was taken on file as P.G. No. 45 of 2003. Notice was issued to the Petitioner Management. During the pendency of the P.G. case, an application in I.A. No. 77 of 2004 was filed seeking a direction to the Petitioner Management to produce the attendance register for the period from 1988 to 1993 and also sought for acquaintance register for the period 2001. The Petitioner Management took up the contention that they are not having those documents and they are having documents only for a period of three years. Thereafter, before the Controlling Authority, the 3rd Respondent examined herself as P.W.1 and on the side of the Petitioner Management the deponent appeared, who is also a proprietor, was examined himself as R.W.1. On the side of the 3rd Respondent, 5 documents were filed and the same were marked as Exs.P1 to P5 and on the side of the Petitioner Management 3 documents were filed and the same were marked as Exs.R1 to R3. The record was summoned from the P.F. Office, which was marked as Court Exhibit No. 1. On the basis of both the oral and documentary evidence, the authority framed three issues.