TATA STEEL LIMITED Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties.

(2.) This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner, while assailing the impugned orders passed by the Deputy Labour Commissioner-cum-Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act as well as the order passed by the Appellate Authority, has submitted that the direction to pay interest at the rate of 10% on the due amount of gratuity is contrary to the provision of Sec. 7 (3-A) of Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1972). He submits that as per the said provision, the maximum interest at the rate of 10% can be awarded. The learned counsel has submitted that the 'maximum' necessarily means that there has to be an application of mind and considering the facts and circumstances of the case any amount less than the same may be required to be paid. The learned counsel has also submitted that a plea was raised before the Appellate Authority that the current simple rate of interest notified by the Central Government on long-term deposits is only 6%, and therefore, the award of 10% was not in accordance with the law. The learned counsel has also submitted that the concerned employee had worked till 4/6/2013, although his date of superannuation has been taken to be 3/7/2011. However, this aspect of the matter has also not been taken into consideration by the authorities.