SATISCHANDRA MEHESHWARI Vs. SHAIK PYARE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The employer is the revision petitioner before me. The respondent was a gate-keeper at the Royal Talkies Cinema Hall drawing a salary of Rs. 55 per month. He filed an application under Sec. 36 of the Hyderabad Shops and Establishments Act 5 of 1951 (hereinafter called the Act) alleging inter alia that the employer was pressing him to resign contending that he had become old and showed his willingness to pay some compensation if he agreed to resign. On such persuasion he put his signature to Ext. R-l, a resignation letter. It was contended by him that he did so under the impression that lie would get some compensation. He was, however, paid salary for the number of days he worked in Aug. 1963 and was told that he would not get anything beyond that. He, therefore, applied for the grant of leave pay Rs. 44, notice pay Rs. 55 and Rs. 550 towards gratuity. Thus, in all he claimed Rs. 649.

(2.) This petition was resisted by the employer. His contention was that the employee had voluntarily resigned from his post. He did not give any notice as is required under Sec. 37 of the Act. The petitioner, therefore, was neither entitled to the gratuity nor any wages as claimed by him.

(3.) On the material available the authority under the Payment of Wages Act found that the employee had voluntarily resigned. It was further found by him that the employee was over 60 years of age. In view of these findings the authority thought that it is Sec. 36 (3) which would apply to the facts of the case and found that the employee was entitled to gratuity and wages under S. 36 and as the employee failed to serve a months notice under Sec. 37 of the Act, he would not get wages of 15 days.