FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA Vs. SHYAM SUNDER DEEPAK
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH
FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA
SHYAM SUNDER DEEPAK
Click here to view full judgement.
SUNIL KUMAR SINHA,J. -
(1.)THE appellant, Food Corporation of India, has preferred this appeal against the order dated 28-10-2006 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 416/2002 as the writ petition filed by the appellant against the order dated 21-12-2001 passed by the Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") has been dismissed by the Writ Court.
(2.)THE brief facts are that while working as an officiating copyist in the establishment of District and Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, respondent No. 1 applied for appointment to the post of Assistant Grade-Ill in the petitioner-Corporation. His application, duly recommended and forwarded by the District and Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, was forwarded by the District Manager of the appellant to the FCI, Bhopal on 18-1-1968. THEreafter, vide office order dated 7-2-1968, he was selected for appointment to the post of Assistant Grade-Ill and was directed to join the Office of District Manager, Bilaspur, within 3 days of the issuance of the said order. It was mentioned in the order that the formal appointment order will be issued by the Officer on Special Duty. THEreafter, a formal appointment order was issued to respondent No. 1 on 2-3-1968.
Admittedly, respondent No. 1 worked with the appellant from 8-2-1968 to 31-3-1998, i.e., till the date of his superannuation. Before joining of respondent No. 1 in the establishment of the appellant, the District and Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, issued an order dated 14-12-1967 terminating the service of respondent No. 1 with effect from 20-1-1968 A.N. saying that the same was no longer required. When the gratuity of respondent No. 1 was paid, the period of services rendered by him in the office of District and Sessions Judge was not taken into account by the appellant and respondent No. 1 was paid gratuity for the services rendered by him with the appellant from 8-2-1968 till 31-3-1998.
(3.)BEING aggrieved by the said action of the appellant, the respondent No. 1 filed a case before the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. The said authority dismissed the case of respondent No. 1 vide order dated 30-7-1999 holding that respondent No. 1 failed to establish that the Food Corporation of India was required to take into account the services rendered in the Government for the purpose of gratuity.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.