PARADEEP PORT TRUST Vs. CONTROLLING AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short question that arises for determination in this Writ Petition is whether the Pradeep Port Trust, a Major Port is governed by the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, hereinafter to as 'the Act' for brevity. -

(2.) Some of the retired employees of the Petitioner-trust, i.e. Paradeep Port Trust have filed several petitions before the controlling Authority. i.e. Opp. Party No. 1 for payment of differential amount of gratuity under the Act & seeking various other relief under the Act. On the basis of such applications, the Controlling Authority issued notice to the Petitioner-trust directing it to show-cause why relief sought under the Gratuity Act shall not be granted to the employees. Petitioner preferred a wit petition bearing no 8957 of 2005 seeking to quash the notices issued by the Controlling Authority on the plea of lack of jurisdiction.

(3.) Petitioner claimed that it being a 'Major Port' is not coming under the applicability of the Gratuity Act as the relevant Section does not make the Act applicable to Major Port though the Ports are included in the Act Major Port is governed under the Major Port Trust Act, 1963, hereinafter referred to as the 'MPT Act', & the said Act gives the Board independent powers to make regulations for payment of gratuity along with other service conditions subject to approval of Central Government, The Petitioner-trust has drafted its own regulations & sent the same for approval to the Central Government. Petitioner-trust functions under the Central Government as the Central Government has the ultimate power & control to frame rules directions supersede the Board & inspect to work, appoint the Chairman & Board of Trustees, as it is a statutory authority under the 'MPT Act'. In the aforesaid Writ Petition, this Court directed the Petitioner-trust to raise preliminary objection before the Controlling Authority with regard to applicability of the Payment of Gratuity Act to the Paradeep Port Trust. The Court further directed that the said objections shall be decided first before proceeding with the hearing of the case. Pursuant to the Hon'ble Court's directions, the Petitioner-trust raised the preliminary objection, which was negatived by the Controlling Authority by the Order Dated 19.09.2005. Petitioner-trust assails such order on the ground that it is bad in law, misconceived, based on conjectures & surmises. Hence, Petitioner-trust prayed to quash the order passed by the Controlling Authority.