S N VERMA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing order dated January 25, 2002 (Annexure-A/9) by which the application of the petitioner for payment of gratuity has been rejected and for a direction to the respondents to pay gratuity to him.

(2.) It is not in dispute that the petitioner retired from the services of Janpad Panchayat, Kherlanji, district Balaghat on attaining age of superannuation of 58 years on 30/06/1996. The petitioner claimed gratuity but it has been rejected. He made several representations and even then it was not paid to him. In the judgment dated 27/06/1997 in Writ Petition No. 1743 of 1997 of this Court there are certain observations that a Janpad Employee is entitled to gratuity but not the pension as per Madhya Pradesh Janpad Panchayat Employees (Qualifications, Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1976. This judgment is reported in Janpad Panchayat Tatha Zila Panchayat Karamchari Sangh and others v. State of M.P. and others, 1998 (1) JLJ 336. The petitioner has not been paid the gratuity on the ground that he had retired before the date of this judgment. That is also the stand taken by the respondents in their return.

(3.) The learned counsel for both the sides have been heard. The Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') would apply to the case of the petitioner and other Panchayat employees. The definitions of "employee" and "employer" are given in Section 2(e) and (f) of the Act, which are as under: