UNION OF INDIA Vs. BHAGAT RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) C.M.P. (M) No. 252/2009 Heard. The application is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. L.P.A. No. 33/2009 This is an appeal filed by the Union of India aggrieved by the judgment dated October 17,2008 passed in C.W.P. No. 1350/2005. The Union of India challenged the order passed by the Controlling Authority and the Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 wherein it has been found that the respondent-employee was entitled to gratuity under the Act. The learned single Judge on facts found that the respondent had been engaged as a Chowkidar w.e.f. May 2, 1984 initially and that spell continued upto August, 1985. Thereafter, he was re-engaged as such on October 10, 1985 until his superannuation on October 25, 2002. The learned single Judge has taken note of the fact that there was no dispute as to the engagement of the employee, as above. Since the employee was not paid any gratuity at the time of his superannuation, he filed an application under Section 7(4) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 claiming an amount of Rs. 23764/-.

(2.) MR. Sandeep Sharma, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India submits that the respondent-employee having been engaged only as a part time Chowkidar, he will not be covered by the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. It is further contended that having been paid his part time wages from contingency fund, he cannot be treated under the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules either.

(3.) AS has been rightly held by the learned single Judge that the Post Office, where the respondent-employee has been engaged is certainly an establishment coming under the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act. Since the employee working in that establishment is not covered or governed by the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972, he is entitled to gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. After all that employee who worked in a Post Office as Chowkidar for over 18 years, the gratuity paid is only an amount of Rs. 23764/-. In that view of the matter also, we do not find any legal infirmity in the judgment under appeal. The appeal stands dismissed.