- (1.) THIS appeal arises out of the order passed in W. P. (S) No. 1418/2003. The appellant was the 3rd respondent in the said writ petition. TISCO had filed the said petition challenging the order dated February 24,2003 passed by the dy. Labour Commissioner-cum-Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. By the said order TISCO were directed to pay the amount of gratuity to the appellant observing that they cannot withhold the gratuity for not vacating company's quarter by her in view of the provision contained in Section 4 (6) of the payment of Gratuity Act. Before proceeding further with the case, it is pertinent to mention here that during the pendency of the writ petition, the 3rd respondent-appellant vacated the Company's quarter and has received the amount of gratuity. However, that culmination was preceded by the events which will be discussed in the succeeding paragraphs.
(2.) AFTER the Company's quarter was vacated by the 3rd respondent-appellant and the amounts of gratuity and other dues were paid to her, learned single Judge might have thought that the purpose of the writ petition was achieved and nothing further remained to be decided in the writ petition. Learned single judge thus disposed of the writ petition as hereunder: "having regard to the fact that the 3rd respondent has vacated the quarter of the tisco and substantial admitted dues have been paid by the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to give any finding with regard to claim and counter claim, made by the parties. . . . . . " He also set aside the order dated February 24, 2003 passed by the said Authority.
(3.) LEARNED single Judge further directed the TISCO to forward a chart to the 3rd respondent showing details of deductions and payments etc. with liberty to the appellant to bring to the notice of the competent authority, if there is any miscalculation or non-consideration of the relevant facts according to her. The concerned authority was directed to consider and decide any such claim made by the appellant.;