MAHARASHTRA GRAMIN BANK Vs. DHONDIBA RAGHOJI KAHALEKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the present petition, the petitioner Bank challenges the judgment and order dated 4th January, 2013 in P.O. Appeal No. N-48 (08)/2012- PGA, passed by the appellate authority under Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 & Regional Labour Commissioner (C), Nagpur and the order dated 29.2.2012, passed by the Controlling Authority & Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central), Chandrapur, in File No. ALCH/48 (30)/2011-PGA. Learned Counsel for the petitioner - Bank has sought to canvass before this Court that even if the respondent-employee stood retired on 31st May, 2011 and the charge-sheet was served on him in December, 2012, the petitioner Bank continue to have control over his service and as such, sought to urge that the gratuity claimed by the respondent No. 1 is not payable to him.

(2.) In order to support his contention, the learned Counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the matter of Ch. Cum-Man. Director, Mahanandi Coalfields Ltd. v. Rabindranath Choubey, 2013 AIR(SCW) 6456 The Apex Court, while dealing with the provisions of clause (a) and (b) of sub-section (6) of section 4 of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, having regard to the views expressed by the Apex Court in the case of Jaswant Singh Gill v. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. & Ors., 2007 1 CurLR 427 and in State Bank of India v. Ram Lal Bhaskar & Anr., 2011 2 CurLR 628 , has referred the issue to the Three-Judge Bench, with following observations:--

(3.) In that view of the matter, Rule. Learned Counsel for respondent No. 1 waives service.