STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. NAVINCHANDRA BRIJRATNLAL SHAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These Review Petitions have been filed by the State of Maharashtra to recall the common order dated 25.9.2012 passed in the respective petitions. In that decision, we have held that the Writ Petitioners are entitled for benefit of gratuity amounts having tendered resignation. For taking that view, we have primarily relied on the provisions contained in the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, in particular, section 4 thereof, which was pressed into service by the Writ Petitioners.

(2.) We are pained to place on record that Counsel appearing for the State of Maharashtra during the hearing of Writ Petitions did not even remotely argue the question now posed to us in the present review petitions. On the contrary, the arguments of both sides proceeded on the basis that the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 was applicable to the case on hand. It is on that premise the judgment was delivered and in support of the opinion, reliance was placed on the exposition of the Apex Court in the case of M/s.J.K. Cotton Spg. & and Wvg.Mills vs. State of U.P. & Ors., 1990 AIR(SC) 1808

(3.) It is now accepted by the Counsel for the original Writ Petitioners that the provisions of Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 have no application to judicial officers, in particular and State Government employees, in general. Once this position is accepted, the basis on which the Court proceeded to answer the issue in favour of the original Writ Petitioners would fall to the ground. Hence, the judgement in question deserves to be recalled and the respective Writ Petitions will have to be restored to file, to be heard afresh.