M.P. HOUSING & INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT BOARD Vs. CONTROLLING AUTHORITYCUMASSISTANT LABOURCOMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner, which is body corporate, established under Section 3 of the Madhya Pradesh Griha Nirman Evam Adhosanrachna Vikas Mandal Adhiniyam, 1972. The Petitioner is an instrumentality of the State. It is aggrieved by the orders dated 13.10.2017 and 09.8.2018, respectively.

(2.) The brief facts relating to this case are as follows. The Respondent No.3 namely Umashankar Vyas was initially working as a Choukidaron Work- Charge &Contigency Paid basis from 17/04/1976. On account of a criminal case being filed against the Respondent No.3, his service was terminated w.e.f. 17/02/1978. The Respondent No.3 challenged his termination by filing an industrial reference before the learned Labour Court at Bhopal being Case No.01/2005. The Labour Court vide order dated 24/11/2009 directed that the Respondent No.3 be reinstated in service without back wages. It is also contended that the Labour Court did not give any direction to treat the duration of the termination as the period in continuous service. It is also undisputed that the order dated 24/11/2009 passed by the Labour Court has become final and that it was never challenged by the Petitioner in appeal. The private Respondent was reinstated on 11/02/2010 and a formal order to that effect was issued on 18/03/2010. The Respondent No.3 retired on 30/04/2016 and his last drawn salary was Rs.25,763/-.

(3.) The Respondent No.3 filed an application before the Controlling Authority constituted under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972,being Case No.189/2017, wherein he prayed that an amount of Rs.5,45,647/- be paid as gratuity amount along with interest calculat ing the period of service from 17/04/1976, which is the date of his initial appointment till 30/04/2016, which is the date of his retirement. The Petitioner filed its reply before the competent authority and denied that the Respondent No.3 was in continuous service from 17/04/1976 till 30/04/2016. However, the Petitioner/Board admitted that the Respondent No.3 had regularly been working from 11/02/2010 till 30/04/2016 and hence is entitled to gratuity by calculating the service period only from 11/02/2010 to 30/04/2016, which came to Rs.89,176/-. The Controlling Authority passed its order on 13/10/2017 wherein it held that the Respondent No.3 was entitled for gratuity and for computation of gratuity for the entire period commencing from 17/04/1976 to 17/04/1978, when his service was terminated on account of the criminal trial and thereafter, from 11/02/2010 till 30/04/2016 to be counted for the purpose of assessing his gratuity. Accordingly, the Controlling Authority worked out the gratuity amount to Rs.1,18,906/-.