PERMOD KOHLI, J. - (1.) PETITIONER was working as Personnel Manager under the respondent-BCCL. While in service he was served with a charge-sheet and later dismissed from service on February 5, 1993. The order of dismissal came to be challenged before the Patna High Court, Ranchi Bench. Writ petition filed was allowed and the dismissal order set aside vide judgment of the Court dated May 26, 1995. In a Special Leave Petition filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, the case was remanded back to High Court. In the meanwhile, petitioner retired from service on July 31, 1995. The disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner pursuant to the order passed by the Court dated March 14, 1997 after remand. Disciplinary proceedings resulted in his exoneration vide order passed on March 23, 1998. PETITIONER was paid an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- as gratuity on July 8, 1998 without statutory interest. He made an application before the controlling authority who after hearing the parties passed an order dated October 29, 2001 directing the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 to pay simple interest @ 10% p. a. on the amount of gratuity i.e., Rs. 1,00,000/- for the period January 9, 1995 to July 30, 1998. This amount was worked out as Rs. 28333/-. Employer filed an appeal before respondent No. 1 (appellate authority). This appeal was however allowed to be withdrawn vide order dated March 22, 2002 with a liberty to file a fresh one, the same having been filed by incompetent person. In view of the liberty granted, respondent filed second appeal being Case No. P.G. Appeal 10/2002 against the order dated October 29, 2001 passed by the controlling authority granting interest. Appellate authority vide his order dated May 15, 2002 reduced the amount of interest from Rs. 28,333/-to Rs. 2,917/- vide order dated May 15, 2002. The appellate authority modified the order of the controlling authority on the ground that employee though retired in 1995 applied before the controlling authority on December 20, 1999 and no justification or reasons were given for such a delay. Accordingly, the amount of interest ordered to be paid w.e.f. April 23, 1998 i. e., 30 days after the date of exoneration. PETITIONER has challenged this order primarily on the ground that the order of appellate authority is contrary to provisions of Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. Even in the counter, respondents have defended the order of the appellate authority on the ground indicated in the order by stating that petitioner for the first time filed an application in Form "N" on December 20, 1999 while he retired on July 31, 1995 without any explanation for delay. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has relied upon Sections 7(2) and 7(3-A) of Payment of Gratuity Act. Relevant extract of Section 7 is quoted here under: "7. Determination of the amount of gratuity.-(1)-A. person who is eligible for payment of gratuity under this Act or any person authorized, in writing to act on his behalf shall send a written application to the employer, within such time and in such form, as may be prescribed, for payment of such gratuity. (2) As soon as gratuity becomes payable, the employer shall, whether an application referred to in sub-section (1) has been made or not, determine the amount of gratuity and give notice in writing to the person to whom the gratuity is payable and also to the controlling authority specifying the amount of gratuity so determined. (3) The employer shall arrange to pay the amount of gratuity within thirty days from the date it becomes payable to the person to whom the gratuity is payable. (3-A) If the amount of gratuity payable under sub-section (3) is not paid by the employer within the period specified in sub-section (3), the employer shall pay, from the date on which the gratuity becomes payable to the date on which it is paid, simple interest at such rate, not exceeding the rate notified by the Central Government from time to time for repayment of long-term deposits, as that Government may, by notification specify. Provided that no such interest shall be payable if the delay in the payment is due to the fault of the employee and the employer has obtained permission in writing from the controlling authority for the delayed payment on this ground." This provision has been interpreted by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case of H. Gangahanume Gowda v. Karnataka Agro Industries Corporation Ltd., AIR 2003 SC 1526 : (2003) 3 SCC 40 : 2003-1- LLJ-1119 what has been observed by the Apex Court is noticed as under at p. 1122 of LLJ: "8. It is clear from what is extracted above from the order of learned single Judge that interest on delayed payment of gratuity was denied only on the ground that there was doubt whether the appellant was entitled to gratuity, cash equivalent to leave, etc., in view of divergent opinion of the Courts during the pendency of inquiry. The learned single Judge having held that the appellant was entitled for payment of gratuity was not right in denying the interest on delayed payment of gratuity having due regard to Section 7(3-A) of the Act. It was not the case of the respondents that the delay in the payment of gratuity was due to the fault of the employee and that it had obtained permission in writing from the controlling authority for the delayed payment on that ground. As noticed above, there is a clear mandate in the provisions of Section 7 to the employer for payment of gratuity within time and to pay interest on the delayed payment of gratuity. There is also provision to recover the amount of gratuity with compound interest in case amount of gratuity payable was not paid by the employer in terms of Section 8 of the Act. Since the employer did not satisfy the mandatory requirements of the proviso to Section 7(3-A), no discretion was left to deny the interest to the appellant on belated payment of gratuity....."
(2.) IN the present case only ground for denying statutory interest is late submission of application by employee. Admittedly, petitioner has been dismissed from service and his dismissal order was set aside and finally he was exonerated from the charge by the disciplinary authority. Payment of gratuity is the responsibility of the employer. If amount is not paid within 30 days from the date it became due, the employee is entitled to statutory interest. IN view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and noticed herein above the order impugned dated May 15, 2002 is not sustainable and is hereby set aside. Respondents are directed to pay the interest as determined by the controlling authority to the petitioner within four weeks, failing which petitioner shall be entitled to penal interest at the rate of 6% on this amount till the amount is actually paid.;