EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, HPSEBL Vs. MADAN LAL NEGI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition, the respondentestablishment (petitioner herein) before the Controlling Authority-cum Labour Officer under the Payment of Gratuity Act 1972, hereinafter referred to as the Act, has challenged the order Annexure P-5 dated 19.7.2014 passed by the Joint Labour Commissioner-cum-Appellate Authority under the Act in case No.JLC/HP/Gratuity/5-12/2013, whereby the order Annexure P-3, dated 20.11.2012 passed by the Controlling Authority under the Act has been modified and a sum of Rs.30, 138/- assessed towards gratuity payable for the period 26.10.1986 to 31.12.1997 to the claimant-workman (respondent herein) .

(2.) As per the undisputed facts, the claimant-workman was engaged as Beldar by the respondent-establishment in the year 1986. His services were regularized in the year 1998 as T-Mate. He, however, was denied the benefit of gratuity payable to him under the provisions of the Act during the period he remained working as Beldar on daily wages basis. He, therefore, preferred claim petition Annexure P-1 before Labour Officer-cum-Controlling Authority under the Act, which was allowed vide order Annexure P-3 and a sum of Rs.8, 713/- was ordered to be paid towards gratuity to the claimant-workman together with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the application till the payment is made. The respondent-establishment has not assailed this order. It is, however, the claimant-workman preferred the appeal Annexure P-4 to this writ petition, which has been allowed vide impugned order passed by learned Appellate Authority on 19.7.2014 Annexure P-5 and in modification of the order passed by the Controlling Authority, due and admissible amount payable to the claimant-workman towards gratuity was enhanced to Rs.30, 138/- along with interest @ 9% per annum till the same is actually paid.

(3.) It is this order, which is under challenge in the present petition. The complaint is that learned Appellate Authority has wrongly assessed the gratuity payable to the claimant-workman on the basis of last pay he drawn while working on regular basis. Such ground of challenge is not available to the respondent-establishment for the reasons that a coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 50 of 2003, titled HPSEB & Another versus Balak Ram and another, decided on 1.6.2007 has held the assessment of the gratuity made on the basis of last pay drawn on regular basis is legal and valid. Similar is the view of the matter taken again by a coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 2307 of 2016, titled Principal Secretary (Forest) and another versus Amar Chand and another, decided on 112.2017.