J.J.MUNIR,J. - (1.) This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been brought by Mahak Singh, an employee of Cooperative Cane Development Limited, Railway Road, Deoband, Saharanpur through its Secretary, who are a Cane Cooperative Society registered under the U.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965. Admittedly, the petitioner was appointed as a seasonal clerk with respondent no. 3, last mentioned (for short the 'society') on 09.12.1975 and retired from service, as such, on 31.08.2014, upon attaining the age of superannuation. The petitioner rendered 39 years of service. At the time of retirement, the last salary drawn by the petitioner was Rs. 16,690/- per mensem. Upon retirement, the petitioner was paid a sum of Rs. 3,62,754/- in gratuity, calculating it at the rate of seven days wages for each season, multiplying it with the total number of seasons that were reckoned to be 37 by the Society. Thus calculated, the petitioner was paid gratuity in the sum of Rs. 3,62,754/-, in accordance with the provisions of the second proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 4 of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (for short the 'Act').
(2.) The petitioner claims that though employed as a seasonal clerk by the Society, he has admittedly worked for more than 240 days regularly, thus being employed throughout the year, and, upon that fact even if the Society are held to be a seasonable establishment, the petitioner is entitled to be paid gratuity @ 15 days wages based on the rate of wages last drawn for every completed year of service or part thereof in excess of six months in accordance with sub section (2) of Section 4 of the Act. Reckoned thus, the petitioner would be entitled to gratuity in the sum of Rs. 7,77,330/-, which after deducting the sum already paid to him on that account, short of his entitlement, the Society still owes to the petitioner a sum of Rs. 4,14,576/-.
(3.) It is also contended by the petitioner that apart from designating him a seasonable clerk, the Society are not entitled to rely on the second proviso to sub section (2) of Section 4 of the Act, inasmuch as, they are not at all a seasonal establishment. It is urged in the supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioner, in particular, that the Society are not a seasonal establishment within the meaning of the second proviso to Section 4(2) of the Act. He has relied on a specific certification tendered in answer to information about the status of the society sought by one Suresh Pal Singh s/o Amar Singh from the District Cane Officer, Saharanpur, where it has been certified vide Memo No. 1297, amongst other things, that Cooperative Cane Societies are not seasonal establishments, but Cooperative Societies.;