RABINDRA NATH BANERJEE Vs. CERTIFICATE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ application the petitioner a retired employee of Dunlop India Limited, a company duly incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, he prayed the following reliefs :

(2.) This application has been opposed by filing affidavit by the respondent No. 3, contending, inter alia, that since the respondent company being a sick industry awaiting rehabilitation programme by approval of the scheme under the provisions of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 hereinafter referred to as SICA, 1985, under Section 22 of the said Act, no recovery proceeding could be initiated.

(3.) The short question involved in this case as to whether due to Section 22 of SICA, 1985, the recovery proceeding for realization of Gratuity amount under Public Demands Recovery Act would be kept pending. Before an answer to the question, the basic jurisprudential concept of the payments of gratuity and the constitutional mandates to that effect are required to be looked into. Gratuity is payable now under a Statutory Provision namely Payments of Gratuity Act, 1972 hereinafter referred to as Gratuity Act for brevity. Under Section 14 of the said Act due to incorporation of non-obstante clause, gratuity amount cannot be withheld under any circumstances. Section 14 reads thus :