- (1.) SINCE the issues raised in these writ petitions are common, the same are being decided together. For facility and convenience, the facts of Writ Petition No. 16472/2002 is being taken into consideration. The respondent No. 3 was promoted on the post of Senior Manager and became a Member of the Centralized Services in the year 1988. The respondent No. 3 worked as a key personnel (senior Manager) in District co-operative Bank Limited, Ghaziabad and retired from the service on January 31, 1998 after putting a total period of 36 years, one month and 13 days of service. The petitioner computed and paid the gratuity amounting to rs. 2,36,430/ -. Since the amount was not fully paid, the respondent No. 3 made a representation to the authorities for the payment of the balance amount. Since nothing was done on his application, the respondent No. 3 preferred a time barred claim before the prescribed authority under Section 4 of the payment of Gratuity Act along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation act for condoning the delay. It was indicated that the last drawn salary of respondent No 3 was Rs. 15,503/- and on the basis of the length of service, the total amount payable was Rs. 2,79,045/- and that, only a sum of Rs. 2,36,430/- was paid and therefore, the balance amount of Rs. 42,615/-was required to be paid.
(2.) THE petitioner filed their objections before the prescribed authority submitting that the gratuity had been paid in accordance with the provisions of Regulation 67 of the Co-operative banks Centralized Services Regulations framed under Rule 7 (c) of the Co-operative Banks centralized Service Rules, 1976 as well as in accordance with the Co-operative Banks centralized Service Group, Gratuity-cum-Life assurance Scheme and that no further amount was payable to respondent No. 3. The petitioner further contended that the provisions of the payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 was not applicable and that no proceedings could be initiated against the petitioner. Further, the controlling Authority, Ghaziabad Region, was not competent nor had the territorial jurisdiction to decide the matter against the petitioner.
(3.) THE Controlling Authority allowed the claim petition of respondent No. 3 and computed the gratuity and directed that respondent No. 3 was entitled to receive Rs. 85,555/- towards the balance amount of gratuity plus interest @ 10% per annum w. e. f. August 6, 1998 till the date of the payment. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed an appeal which was partly allowed and the amount of gratuity was reduced to Rs. 42,625/-along with interest @ 10% per annum, The petitioner being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, has filed present writ petition.;