NEELACHAL ISPAT NIGAM LTD. Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above noted review application has been filed by the review petitioner, who was Opposite Party No.4 in W.P.(C) No.18066 of 2017, challenging order dtd. 4/9/2017 and with further prayer to dismiss the writ petition by holding that the amount of gratuity determining under Annexure-1 and rejection of review under Annexure-2 apart from the entire P.G. Case No.03 of 2016 being null and void, no recovery is possible from review petitioner.

(2.) The factual matrix of the case, in a nutshell, is that the Opposite Party No.4 in the review petition filed W.P.(C) No.18066 of 2017, as the petitioner, inter alia praying for a direction to the review petitioner as well as to the controlling authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act (Opposite Party No.3) to dispose of the application in FORM-T for recovery of gratuity amount filed by the Opposite Party No.4. Further the Opposite Party No.4-writ petitioner had also prayed for recovery of gratuity pursuant to order dtd. 6/4/2017 in P.G. Case No.3 of 2016 passed by the Opposite Party No.3, which was confirmed by the Opposite Party No.3by dismissing the review filed by the review petitioner vide order dtd. 30/6/2017.

(3.) On perusal of the records of W.P.(C) No.18066 of 2017, it is seen that a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dtd. 4/9/2017 disposed of the said writ petition at the stage of admission without issuing notice to the Opposite Parties. Furthermore, the writ petition was disposed of with the following direction:-