STATE OF M.P. Vs. SHIVNATH SINGH KUSHWAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petitions have been filed by the petitioner/State of Madhya Pradesh and its functionaries being aggrieved by the Order dtd. 3/9/2024 passed by the Controlling authority under Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 thereby allowing the claim of the respondent No.1 to get Gratuity on account of services rendered as Shiksha Karmi Grade II and thereafter, as Adhyapak and then as Madhyamik Shikshak. Since the issues arising in both the matters are similar, they were heard analogously and are being decided by this common order. For the sake of convenience, facts are taken from W.P.No.31272/2024.

(2.) The Controlling Authority has held the Respondent No.1 entitled to get Gratuity of Rs.6,92,289.00 alongwith interest Rs.3,12,478.00 i.e, total Rs.10,04,767.00 with future interest till the date of payment. The said Order has been assailed by the State of Madhya Pradesh and its functionaries stating that the State Govt. is not liable to pay Gratuity to the respondent No.1.

(3.) Shri Ravindra Dixit, learned Government Advocate has vehemently argued that the respondent No.1 cannot be said to be an employee in terms of Sec. 2 (e) of Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 nor the petitioners (State Govt.) cannot be said to be employer in terms of Sec. 2(f) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (for short, hereinafter referred to as Act of 1972). It is further argued that the payment of Gratuity Act does not apply to the employees employed by the State Govt. or the Central Govt. or that the said Act would not apply to the Petitioners and therefore, the Order passed by the Controlling Authority is totally devoid of jurisdiction and therefore, the petitioners are not liable to be relegated to avail the alternative remedy of appeal in terms of Sec. 7 (7) of the Act of 1972.